Trump Tariffs Allowed Until 'June 9'... Court of Appeals Accepts White House Request

Plaintiffs and Defendants Required to Submit Documents by June 9

Tariffs Remain in Effect Until Then

Future Tariff Imposition Depends on Court of Appeals Decision

White House: “If Court of Appeals Issues No Temporary Order, We Will Immediately Seek Emergency Relief from the Supreme Court”

A United States Federal Court placed a brake on President Donald Trump's tariff plan, but the Court of Appeals has issued a temporary stay on this ruling. As a result, the tariffs will remain in effect at least until June 9. Whether the effectiveness of these tariffs will continue until the result of the appeal comes out will again be determined by the Court of Appeals. The U.S. government has stated it will immediately request emergency relief from the Supreme Court if the Court of Appeals does not recognize the tariffs' effectiveness.

On the 29th (local time), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit announced that it would suspend the effect of the lower court's ruling—the United States Court of International Trade (CIT)—“until further notice.”

The U.S. government submitted an application to suspend the effect of the lower court judgment and the injunction during the appeal period, and while considering this application, the Court immediately granted an immediate administrative stay. As a result, the effect of the CIT’s ruling and permanent injunction was temporarily halted until the Court of Appeals reviews the application documents.

The previous afternoon, the CIT ruled that President Trump's tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) were illegal and exceeded the President’s authority. The court invalidated the tariffs imposed under IEEPA, including reciprocal tariffs and those on Canada, Mexico, and China regarding fentanyl, and ruled they are “permanently” prohibited.

After this verdict, the White House immediately appealed. Since the Court of Appeals has suspended the effect of the lower court ruling during the appeal period, the tariffs will remain for the time being. Kevin Hassett, Chairman of the National Economic Council (NEC), told Fox News in an interview that this was “a major victory for the President.” Hassett emphasized that “President Trump's argument is as solid as a wall.”

The Court of Appeals said that plaintiffs who filed the lawsuit must submit their responses to the U.S. government’s application for suspension by June 5, and the U.S. government must submit a reply brief by June 9. After reviewing the documents submitted by June 9, the Court explained that it will decide whether to continue suspending the lower court ruling during the appeal period.

If the court grants the application for a stay during the appeal (so that the first-instance verdict will not take effect), the tariffs could continue until the completion of the appeals process. The stay decision is handled separately from the appeal process itself. Even if the stay (maintenance of tariffs) continues, the White House could still lose on appeal, and vice versa.

According to CNBC, the Trump administration may request the Supreme Court to immediately suspend the federal court’s ruling as early as Friday. In documents submitted Thursday morning to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, the U.S. government asserted it would request “emergency relief” from the Supreme Court “to prevent irreparable harm to national security and the economy” if the appeals court does not swiftly grant at least a temporary stay of the tariff decision.

With decisions by both the executive and judicial branches now drastically shaping tariff policy, greater uncertainty is now hanging over future global tariff policies. Caroline Leavitt, White House spokesperson, told reporters that the three judges “have blatantly abused judicial authority to prevent President Trump from carrying out the mandate given by the American people,” and that “these judges are threatening to undermine American credibility on the world stage.” The judges in question—Jane Restani, Timothy Reif, and Gary Katzmann—were respectively appointed under the Reagan, Obama, and Trump administrations.

There is considerable possibility that the Trump administration will bring up different tariffs or continue to apply 'tailored strategies' by country. It could also use not only Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act, already being used for product-specific tariffs, but also Section 122—which allows the President to impose tariffs within a 15% range for 150 days to correct trade deficits—and Section 338, which empowers the President to impose up to 50% tariffs on imports from countries that discriminate against U.S. commerce, as a likely alternative.

Regarding this, Hassett noted that while the administration “can take various approaches, currently there are no plans to do so,” adding, “because we are very certain how truly wrong this (first-instance ruling) situation is.”

According to the Financial Times (FT), Citigroup assessed, “The Trump administration is very likely to succeed in its appeal, or use another legal basis to raise tariffs and maintain tax revenue.” Although the U.S. stock market rose after the ruling, the rally slowed, and both the S&P 500 and the tech-heavy NASDAQ Composite Index closed up 0.4% respectively.

Washington, D.C. = Lee Sang-eun, Correspondent selee@hankyung.com