The Trump administration has requested the US Supreme Court (SC) to expedite a review of its tariffs, which were invalidated by a federal appeal court ruling.

The ruling deemed the President Trump exheeded his authority under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a key component of his economic and trade agenda.

The Justice Department’s appeal follows an August 29 decision that undermined a significant priority for Trump during his second term. The administration is asking the court to decide whether to hear the case by September 10 and to hold oral arguments in November, as new term begins on October 6.

Solicitor General D.John Sauer emphasised the high stakes of the case, stating “The President and his cabinet officials have determined that the tariffs are promoting peace and unprecedented economic properity”.

He cautioned that losing tariff authority could expose the US to trade retaliation and economic instability.

Lawyers representing small businesses challenging the tariffs have not opposed the government’s request for a Supreme Court hearing. An attorney for the Liberty Justice Center, Jeffrey Schwab expressed confidence in their case, highlighting the negative impact of the tariffs on small businesses.

These tariffs are part of the trade war initiated by Trump since taking office in January which has strained relations with trading partners and contributed to financial market volatility. Trump has leveraged tariffs as a tool of foreign policy to renegotiate trade agreements and pressure exporting countries.

The legal dispute center on Trump’s use of IEEPA to impose tariffs intended to address trade deficits and combat drug trafficking. Historically, IEEPA has been invoked for sanctions and asset freezes but has not been used by tariffs until now.

The appeals court ruling originated from two challenges: one from small businesses , including a wine importer from New York and a fishing retailer from Pennsylvania and another from twelve Democratic led states.

These lawsuits argue that the Constitution grants Congress not the president the power to impose taxes and tariffs.

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit agreed with this perspective, asserting that the president’s regulatory powers under IEEPA do not extend to imposing tariffs.

The court also stated that the administration’s broad interpretation of IEEPA contradicts the Supreme Court’s “major questions” doctrine, which requires clear Congressional authorisation for significant executive actions.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, in a declaration accompanying the appeal urged prompt action from the Supreme Court arguing that the appeals court’s decision hampers Trump’s ability to conduct diplomacy and safeguard national security.

In addition, to the ongoing tariff cases, the administration faces other legal challenges including a potential Supreme Court battle over the independence of the Federal Reserve, setting the stage for a broader legal confrontation over Trump’s economic policies in the coming months.