Trump Tells Court His Tariffs Can’t Be Reviewed by Judges (1)

The Trump administration asked the US trade court to reject a lawsuit by small businesses challenging the president’s global tariffs, arguing that judges don’t have the authority to review the national emergency he invoked to justify the sweeping levies.

The businesses are improperly questioning the veracity of President Donald Trump’s assertion of a national emergency, “inviting judicial second-guessing of the president’s judgment,” the Justice Department said in a filing late Tuesday in the US Court of International Trade.

Trump is attempting to stave off claims that his trade war is based on a false emergency and therefore illegal. The 78-year-old Republican issued the tariffs after asserting in an executive order that US trade deficits had become a major threat to national security and military readiness.

“Congress designated itself — not the judiciary — as the body to supervise emergency declarations and the adequacy of the president’s response,” said the government.

The filing comes as Wall Street continues to reel from Trump’s levies as well as a series of delays and reversals. Supply disruptions are expected to hit American consumers in the coming months, particularly after the US raised levies on China to 145%.

Clash Ahead?

The suit is among several filed by conservative legal advocacy groups on behalf of small businesses. An injunction would be a major setback for one of Trump’s signature economic policies, and potentially trigger yet another clash between the executive and judicial branches.

Read More: Trump’s Tariff Rationale Challenged in Suit by Small Firms

The suit against Trump and his administration was filed earlier this month in response to his “Liberation Day” executive orders rolling out the tariffs. The businesses argue that his use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose tariffs is unconstitutional and that the emergency he declared “is a figment of his own imagination.”

Donald Trump holds a chart as he delivers remarks on reciprocal tariffs at the White House in Washington, DC, on April 2.

Photographer: Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty Images

The filing doubles down on Trump’s use of the emergency act, citing his concern that US trade deficits have compromised the nation’s “military readiness” and “national security posture.” Any court intervention on the matter would undermine the president’s ability to use “his foreign-affairs powers to protect the United States’ economy and national security,” according to the filing.

The specialized trade court in New York has assigned the tariff challenge to a three-judge panel that includes one judge appointed by Trump, one by Barack Obama and one by Ronald Reagan. The panel last week refused a request by the five small businesses represented by the Liberty Justice Center to immediately halt Trump’s tariffs, saying the companies failed to show the levies would cause them “immediate and irreparable harm.”

Even so, the companies have now asked for a longer-lasting preliminary injunction against the tariffs and to enter a judgment in their favor without a trial.

A group of Democratic state attorneys general has also sued in the same court. A judge asked the states to respond to the government’s filing in the suit by the small businesses by May 7, though they aren’t required to do so. The administration must respond by May 12.

The administration is trying to transfer other cases that were filed in federal district courts to the Court of International Trade, arguing that it has “exclusive jurisdiction” over tariff disputes.

‘Personal Opinions’

The US said the businesses’ lawsuit is based on the companies’ “personal opinions on economic theory” supported by their conception of a “mainstream economic consensus.”

“But whether that is so is precisely the sort of judgment committed to the political branches of government,” the US said.

Is Trump’s Use of Emergency Law for Tariffs Legal?: QuickTake

And the government said the harm the plaintiffs claim from the tariffs is too speculative because they haven’t paid the levies yet.

Justice Department lawyers also argued that if the trade court grants a temporary injunction against the administration, it should be limited so it applies only to the plaintiffs in the case rather than nationwide. The US urged the court to require the companies to pay bonds equal to the amount of the potential tariffs in order to continue with their suit if the case moves forward.

The case is V.O.S. Selections v. Donald J. Trump, 25-cv-00066, US Court of International Trade (Manhattan).

(Updates with details from the filing.)

To contact the reporter on this story:
Erik Larson in New York at elarson4@bloomberg.net

To contact the editors responsible for this story:
Misyrlena Egkolfopoulou at megkolfopoul@bloomberg.net

Peter Jeffrey, Peter Blumberg

© 2025 Bloomberg L.P. All rights reserved. Used with permission.