US President Donald Trump ramped up his fierce defense of sweeping tariff policies in a Truth Social post on Sunday, labeling the upcoming Supreme Court hearing as "one of the most important and consequential decisions ever made" by the justices. The Nov. 5 oral arguments will scrutinize Trump's use of the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose global tariffs, a move challenged by small businesses and 12 Democratic-led states as an overreach of executive authority. Trump argued that presidential power to swiftly adjust tariffs is vital for national security and economic leverage, crediting them for record stock market highs, minimal inflation, and successful deals with China and others. Without this flexibility, he warned, America would be "defenseless" against global rivals like China.
The stakes couldn't be higher, with Trump painting a dire picture of a potential ruling against him: "If we win, we will be the Richest, Most Secure Country anywhere in the World, BY FAR. If we lose, our Country could be reduced to almost Third World status—Pray to God that that doesn't happen!" A federal appeals court in August struck down most tariffs as unlawful, noting IEEPA's historical use for sanctions, not trade taxes—a congressional prerogative under the Constitution. Challengers, including toy importer Learning Resources facing $100 million in extra costs, argue the policies disrupt supply chains and hike consumer prices. The Supreme Court fast-tracked the case after granting 18 emergency stays to keep tariffs in place, generating $30 billion in August revenue alone.
Trump highlighted tariffs' role in his agenda, from curbing trade deficits to bolstering manufacturing and countering fentanyl inflows via "trafficking" duties on China, Canada, and Mexico. He recently echoed Great Depression fears, claiming a loss would trigger "1929 all over again" with impossible recovery. The hearing consolidates two cases—Learning Resources v. Trump and one from states like New York and California—focusing on major-questions and non-delegation doctrines. Critics, including Stanford's Michael McConnell, compare it to the 1952 steel mill seizure case, questioning if IEEPA allows such broad presidential taxation.
Also Read: US Will Strike ‘Maximum Leverage’ if China Breaks Rare Earth Pledge Says Bessent
In a nod to judicial gravity, Trump announced he will skip Wednesday's proceedings to "avoid distraction," allowing the nine justices to deliberate without political theater. This follows his earlier flirtation with attending, the first sitting president to do so. Amid broader tests of executive power—like firing Fed Governor Lisa Cook—the tariff saga underscores Trump's emergency declarations for border walls, coal plants, and now trade wars. Analysts warn a defeat could slash the 16.3% effective tariff rate in half, forcing billions in refunds and reshaping global negotiations.
As the court weighs economic chaos versus unchecked authority, Trump's rhetoric risks alienating moderates while rallying his base. With tariffs fueling fiscal gains but sparking lawsuits and market jitters, the outcome could redefine presidential trade powers for decades. For Trump, it's not just policy—it's existential: win big or watch America, in his words, crumble to "Third World" irrelevance.
Also Read: #BiharPolls: PM Modi "Remote-Controlled" by Ambani-Adani, Panics Under Trump Pressure Says Rahul Gandhi