Trump is suddenly at risk of losing a “column” for his commercial strategy and having to recover a large part of $ 159 billion of customs tariffs revenue

Now the Federal Appeal Court threw a barrier on its way.

The American Court of Appeal for the Federal Department Friday ruling Trump went large when he declared national emergency situations to justify comprehensive import taxes on almost every country on Earth. The ruling greatly supports a It has a decision By a specialized federal trade court in New York. However, the decision of the Court of Appeal 7-4 threw part of this ruling, which immediately struck the definitions, which allowed his administration time to appeal to the US Supreme Court.

The ruling was a great setback for Trump, who Wrong trade policies The financial markets shook, Poor companies with uncertainty Fears of high prices and slow economic growth sparked.

What definitions did the court fell?

The court’s decision focuses on the definitions of Trump in April Almost all commercial partners And the well -being that he imposed before that China, Mexico and Canada.

Trump on April 2 – The day of liberation, called it The so -called mutual definitions of up to 50 % imposed on the countries where the United States runs a trade deficit and 10 % of the basic tariffs on almost everyone.

The president later The mutual definitions were suspended For 90 days to give countries time to negotiate commercial agreements with the United States – and reduce US export barriers. Some of them – including the United Kingdom, Japan and the European Union – did unbalanced deals with Trump to avoid the larger customs tariff.

Those who did not wander in Trump’s anger – or incurred them in another way – were more effort earlier this month. Laos shook with a 40 % tariff, for example, and Algeria by 30 %. Trump also kept the basic definitions in place.

On the pretext of an unusual authority to act without the approval of Congress, Trump justified taxes under 1977 The Economic Forces Law for International Emergency By announcing the trade deficit of the United States, a “national emergency”.

In February, the law protested by imposing a tariff on Canada, Mexico and China, saying that Illegal flow of migrants and Drugs across the American border It has reached a national emergency and that the three countries need to do more to stop it.

The United States Constitution gives Congress the authority to set taxes, including definitions. But the legislators gradually allowed the presidents to assume more power on the definitions – and Trump has achieved its most beneficial.

The court’s challenge does not cover another Trump tariff, including fees on Foreign steel, aluminum The cars imposed by the president after the investigation of the Ministry of Commerce continue that these imports were threats to American national security.

It also does not include the customs tariff that Trump imposed on China in his first term – and President Joe Biden maintained – after a government investigation concluded that the Chinese used unsuccessful practices to grant their technology companies an advantage over their competitors from the United States and other Western countries.

Why does the court rule against the president?

The administration argued that the courts had approved the then President Richard Nixon in emergency definitions in the economic chaos that followed his decision to end the policy of linking the US dollar to the price of gold. The Nixon administration has successfully cited its authority under the 1917 trading law, which preceded and provided some legal language later used in IEPA.

In May, the American International Trade Court in New York rejected this argument, and was sentenced to the Tahrir Day tariff “exceeding any authority granted to the president” under the Emergency Authority Law. Upon reaching its decision, the Commercial Court collected two challenges – one with one of one companies and 12 American states – in one case.

On Friday, the Federal Court of Appeal wrote in its ruling 7-4 that “it seems unlikely that Congress is intended … Granting the unlimited president to impose customs tariffs.”

The opposition is one of the judges who did not approve Friday’s ruling wipes a potential legal path for Trump, and concluded that the 1977 law that allows emergency procedures “is not an unconstitutional mandate for the legislative authority under the decisions of the Supreme Court,” which allowed the Legislative Authority to grant some of the president’s powers.

So where does this Trump’s business schedule leave?

The government argued that if Trump’s tariff was beaten, it may have to recover some of the collected import taxes, providing a financial blow to the United States Treasury. The total definition revenues amounted to 159 billion dollars by July, more than twice that it was at the same point in the previous year. In fact, the Ministry of Justice warned in a legal file this month that the cancellation of definitions may mean “financial ruin” for the United States.

Trump can also place a shaky land in an attempt to impose a tariff to move forward.

“Although current commercial deals may not collapse automatically, the administration may lose a pillar of its negotiating strategy, which may encourage foreign governments to resist future demands, delay the implementation of previous obligations, or even seek to re -negotiate conditions.”

The president pledged to take the battle to the Supreme Court. “If it is allowed to stand, this decision will literally destroy the United States of America,” he wrote on the social media platform.

Trump has alternative laws to impose import taxes, but it will be limited to the speed and intensity that he can act with. For example, in its decision in May, the Trade Court noted that Trump maintains a more limited power to impose a customs tariff to counter the trade deficit under another law, the 1974 Trade Law. But this law restricts definitions on 15 % and only 150 days on the United States -run countries with a major commercial deficit.

The administration can also call fees under a different legal authority – Article 232 of the 1962 Trade Expansion Law – as it did with the tariffs on foreign steel, aluminum and cars. But this requires an investigation into the Ministry of Commerce and cannot be imposed simply according to the president’s discretion.

Submit 2025 Fortune Global 500The final ranking of the largest companies in the world. Explore this year’s list.