WASHINGTON: The US Supreme Court agreed on Tuesday to decide the legality of Donald Trump’s sweeping global tariffs, setting up a major test of one of the Republican president’s boldest assertions of executive power that has been central to his economic and trade agenda.
The justices took up the Justice Department’s appeal of a lower court’s ruling that Trump overstepped his authority in imposing most of his tariffs under a federal law meant for emergencies. The court swiftly acted after the administration last week asked it to review the case, which implicates trillions of dollars in customs duties over the next decade.
The court, which begins its next nine-month term on October 6, placed the case on a fast track, scheduling oral arguments for the first week of November.
The justices also agreed to hear a separate challenge to Trump’s tariffs brought by a family-owned toy company, Learning Resources.
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington ruled on August 29 that Trump overreached in invoking a 1977 law known as the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, to impose the tariffs, undercutting a major priority for the president in his second term. The tariffs, however, remain in effect during the appeal to the Supreme Court.
The levies are part of a trade war instigated by Trump since he returned to the presidency in January that has alienated trading partners, increased volatility in financial markets and fueled global economic uncertainty.
Trump has made tariffs a key foreign policy tool, using them to renegotiate trade deals, extract concessions and exert political pressure on other countries.
Trump in April invoked the 1977 law in imposing tariffs on goods imported from individual countries to address trade deficits, as well as separate tariffs announced in February as economic leverage on China, Canada and Mexico to curb the trafficking of fentanyl and illicit drugs into the US
The law gives the president power to deal with “an unusual and extraordinary threat” amid a national emergency. It historically had been used for imposing sanctions on enemies or freezing their assets. Prior to Trump, the law had never been used to impose tariffs.
Trump’s Department of Justice has argued that the law allows tariffs under emergency provisions that authorize a president to “regulate” imports.
“The stakes in this case could not be higher,” the Justice Department said in a filing.
Denying Trump’s tariff power “would expose our nation to trade retaliation without effective defenses and thrust America back to the brink of economic catastrophe,” it added.
Trump has said that if he loses the case the US might have to unwind trade deals, causing the country to “suffer so greatly.”
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office reported in August that the increased duties on imports from foreign countries could reduce the US national deficit by $4 trillion over the next decade.
The appeals court ruling stems from two challenges. One was brought by five small businesses that import goods, including a New York wine and spirits importer and a Pennsylvania-based sport fishing retailer. The other was filed by 12 US states — Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Oregon and Vermont — most of them governed by Democrats.
The US Constitution grants Congress, not the president, the authority to issue taxes and tariffs, and any delegation of that authority must be both explicit and limited, according to the lawsuits.
The Federal Circuit agreed. “It seems unlikely that Congress intended, in enacting IEEPA, to depart from its past practice and grant the president unlimited authority to impose tariffs,” it said in a 7-4 decision.
The appeals court also said that the administration’s expansive view of this law violates the Supreme Court’s “major questions” doctrine, which requires executive branch actions of vast economic and political significance to be clearly authorized by Congress.
The New York-based US Court of International Trade, which has jurisdiction over customs and trade disputes, previously ruled against Trump’s tariff policies on May 28.
Another court in Washington ruled that the law does not authorize Trump’s tariffs, and the administration has appealed that decision as well. At least eight lawsuits have challenged Trump’s tariff policies, including one filed by the state of California.
US Supreme Court to decide legality of Trump’s tariffs
https://arab.news/jfckm
US Supreme Court to decide legality of Trump’s tariffs
- The court, which begins its next nine-month term on October 6, placed the case on a fast track, scheduling oral arguments for the first week of November
- Trump has made tariffs a key foreign policy tool, using them to renegotiate trade deals, extract concessions and exert political pressure on other countries
India rolls out strictest anti-pollution curbs as toxic smog engulfs Delhi
- Private monitors in several parts of northern Delhi recorded AQI spikes between 550 and 700s
- Authorities invoked stage four of the capital region’s emergency pollution-control framework
NEW DELHI: India’s capital choked under a thick blanket of smog on Sunday, with the government imposing anti-pollution curbs after monitoring stations in some areas recorded extremely hazardous air quality.
Home to 30 million people, Delhi has not recorded a single “clean air” day in 2025, with Air Quality Index readings hitting high above the 50 score throughout the year.
On the AQI scale from 0 to 500, good air quality is represented by levels below 50, while levels above 300 are dangerous.
Worsening since late October, official records over the weekend were in the severe to severe-plus range of 400–500, but as 24-hour averages, they did not capture the peaks. Private monitors in several parts of North and North West Delhi recorded AQI spikes above 550 and even into the 700s in real-time.
On Saturday evening, the Ministry of Environment’s Commission for Air Quality Management invoked stage four — the highest level — of the Graded Response Action Plan for Delhi and surrounding areas.
To “prevent further deterioration of air quality in the region,” the commission suspended all non-essential construction, shut stone crushers and mining operations, stopped entry of trucks into the capital region, and ordered schools to shift to hybrid classes or online, where possible.
While authorities blamed the pollution on “adverse meteorological conditions,” residents have been demanding more government action.
“The situation is so bad in Delhi that we don’t have any option but to force kids to do online classes. The government has failed us; it has not done anything to address the issue,” said Nabanita Nayak, who decided for her teenage children to attend school online only, despite concerns over their screen addiction.
“If the kids are too much in front of laptops, that’s also an issue. As a mother, I am worried.”
Delhi’s pollution has been worsening since Diwali in late October, when the average AQI has been above 370, or “very poor.” Since mid-November, it has been over 400, which means “severe” air quality, with certain areas recording 500 and above, which is classified as a “hazardous” level.
“I don’t feel proud living in Delhi. It’s the capital city of the country … We talk about being a developed nation by 2047 — we have deadlines,” said Jagriti Arora, who is keeping her 7-year-old daughter at home to prevent allergy flare-ups caused by air pollution.
“The government has to do something … China had a big problem with pollution, but now they’ve managed to bring it down.”
Delhi’s air quality deteriorates in winter due to local emissions and seasonal weather conditions. Cold temperatures and low wind speeds result in a temperature inversion, which traps pollutants close to the ground instead of letting them disperse. This allows emissions from millions of vehicles, ongoing construction, and nearby industrial activity to accumulate in the air. Urban waste burning and dust from construction sites further add to it.
“This is not a new thing. This has been happening now for over 10 years,” Arora said. “You can see it. You don’t need to actually look at an AQI meter to see how bad the pollution is these days.”
