A federal appeals court on Thursday temporarily reinstated President Donald Trump’s tariffs, putting on hold a lower court’s order that required the administration to remove most tariffs within 10 days.
The decision marks the latest development in an ongoing legal battle over Trump’s trade policies, which aim to boost American businesses and workers by reshaping global commerce.
The emergency stay, granted by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, came just one day after the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled that Trump had exceeded his authority when he implemented sweeping tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).
That ruling had threatened to dismantle key tariffs, including a 10 percent baseline duty on nearly all imports, as well as additional duties specifically targeting imports from China, Canada, and Mexico related to fentanyl trafficking.
Trump’s administration swiftly filed an appeal and asked for an emergency stay, arguing that removing tariffs immediately would cause “catastrophic harms,” including undermining sensitive trade negotiations and jeopardizing national security.
Justice Department attorneys emphasized that the lower court’s injunction would leave the U.S. vulnerable to “predatory trade practices,” noting it would force the U.S. to remove tariffs while other countries remained free to impose tariffs on American goods.
Jeffrey Schwab, senior counsel for the Liberty Justice Center, representing small businesses challenging Trump’s tariffs, described Thursday’s stay as “merely a procedural step.” He expressed confidence that the appeals court would eventually side with businesses suffering from higher costs and disrupted supply chains due to tariffs. Plaintiffs now have until June 5 to formally respond to the government’s motion.
However, the White House struck an optimistic tone despite the uncertainty. Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt reaffirmed the president’s commitment to his tariff policies, stating that the administration would fight the legal battle “all the way to the Supreme Court,” and noting Trump has multiple legal tools beyond IEEPA to implement tariffs.
Trade experts agree. Charles Benoit, an international trade attorney with the Coalition for a Prosperous America, highlighted several other legal options still available to Trump, including Sections 122 and 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, and Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930. Benoit noted these avenues allow the president to impose targeted tariffs of varying percentages to counter unfair foreign trade practices and reduce trade deficits.
The ongoing tariff uncertainty continues to affect U.S. markets. Stocks initially surged after the tariffs were blocked Wednesday but stabilized Thursday following the appeals court decision.
Analysts from Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley advised investors that Trump has sufficient legal avenues to maintain pressure on trading partners, suggesting the trade strategy would likely persist despite court challenges.
As the legal fight continues, the administration appears determined to defend its trade policies. Officials have signaled they are ready to use a range of legal tools to preserve key tariffs, maintain negotiating leverage, and pursue broader trade reforms. Despite the court’s ruling, the White House maintains that tariff authority remains a crucial part of its economic and national security strategy.