Washington, D.C. — President Donald Trump has appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn a recent ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which deemed several of his tariffs illegal. The administration’s petition, filed late Wednesday, urges the justices to quickly affirm that the president possesses the authority to implement these import taxes.

In a narrow 7-4 decision last week, the appeals court asserted that Trump’s tariffs, enacted under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), exceeded his presidential powers. The court emphasized that establishing tariffs is fundamentally within the purview of Congress, not the executive branch. This ruling poses significant implications for Trump’s economic policies and could lead to the government needing to refund billions collected from these tariffs.

The president initially justified the tariffs by citing a trade imbalance that he claimed threatened domestic manufacturing and national security. In April, he declared an economic emergency to support this course of action. Despite the appellate court ruling, it has delayed the implementation of its decision, granting the Trump administration time to seek higher court intervention.

“The stakes in this case could not be higher,” said Solicitor General John Sauer in the filing. He contended that the lower court’s finding has disrupted crucial trade negotiations and raised legal uncertainties regarding the president’s ability to act in defense of the nation’s economic interests.

Attorneys representing plaintiffs, including small businesses challenging the tariffs, express confidence in their case. “These unlawful tariffs are inflicting serious harm on small businesses and jeopardizing their survival,” remarked Jeffrey Schwab of the Liberty Justice Center. He pointedly called for a swift resolution that could alleviate ongoing economic distress for these businesses.

Should the Supreme Court decline to hear the case, the appellate ruling could take effect on October 14, which would enforce the previous decision and its ramifications. In May, a separate ruling from the Court of International Trade also determined the tariffs were unlawful, but that decision was similarly put on hold pending appeal.

The conflicts over these tariffs stem from multiple lawsuits brought forth by small business owners and a coalition of states opposed to the measures. In April, Trump implemented a baseline tariff of 10 percent alongside additional “reciprocal” tariffs aimed at rectifying trade disparities with more than 90 countries.

The appellate court’s ruling not only challenges tariffs against various countries but also addresses levies on imports from Canada, Mexico, and China—tariffs Trump argues are critical for preventing drug imports. However, the decision does not affect other U.S. tariffs, such as those on steel and aluminum, which were enacted under a different directive from the president.

As the legal battle unfolds, the outcome could have lasting repercussions on U.S. trade policy and the nation’s economic landscape, underlining the delicate balance of power between the executive and legislative branches in matters of international trade.