Trump Skips Historic Tariff Hearing: “I Don’t Want to Be a Distraction”

Donald Trump has announced that he will not attend the U.S. Supreme Court hearing on November 5 regarding the legality of his global tariff policy. He described it as one of the most important cases in U.S. history and said he doesn’t want his presence to distract from the decision itself.

A Landmark Case on Presidential Powers The Supreme Court will hear two consolidated cases challenging Trump’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs on a wide range of imports. The 1977 law was originally intended to give presidents the ability to respond quickly to extraordinary threats, such as those posed by hostile foreign states. However, according to the plaintiffs, Trump overstepped his authority by applying the law to both rival and allied nations, claiming it was necessary to protect national security and revive American industry. The ruling could significantly redefine the extent of presidential control over U.S. trade and security policy.

Trump: “Tariffs Make America Strong Again” Speaking aboard Air Force One, Trump defended his tariff policy as essential to protecting American jobs and businesses that have suffered for decades under unfair trade agreements. He emphasized that without the ability to impose tariffs swiftly, the United States would lose its competitive edge and gradually fall behind other world powers. “If the Supreme Court rules against us, it could turn America into a third-world country,” Trump declared. “Our wealth and security depend on the ability to defend ourselves economically when we’re being taken advantage of.” He added that his tariff policies had boosted domestic production and reduced dependency on imports, strengthening the nation’s economic independence.

Companies Push Back: Rising Costs and Higher Prices The lawsuits were brought by two U.S. companies — Learning Resources, Inc. and VOS Selections, Inc. 🔹 Learning Resources argued that the tariffs increased material costs, making it harder to produce affordable educational tools.

🔹 VOS Selections claimed that import duties dramatically raised the prices of alcoholic products, forcing the company to pass those costs on to consumers. Both firms contend that Trump exceeded his constitutional authority, violating the separation of powers between the President and Congress.

Legal Experts Warn of Power Imbalance Jeffrey Schwab, lead attorney for VOS Selections and litigation director at Liberty Justice Center, argued that the IEEPA was never meant for routine trade policy. “It was designed to address emergencies — such as terrorist or financial threats. If a president can invoke it at will, an emergency law becomes a permanent power tool,” he said. Legal scholars warn that Trump’s approach could weaken Congress’s role and set a precedent for broader executive overreach in the future.

A Decision That Could Redefine U.S. Trade Policy The Supreme Court’s verdict could reshape the boundaries of presidential authority and determine whether emergency powers may be applied to economic policy outside immediate security threats. While many lawyers and economists criticize Trump’s strategy, the former president insists that his tariffs made America economically and strategically stronger — and that curbing this power could undermine the nation’s global position for years to come.

#TRUMP , #Tariffs , #USPolitics , #economy , #worldnews

Stay one step ahead – follow our profile and stay informed about everything important in the world of cryptocurrencies! Notice: ,The information and views presented in this article are intended solely for educational purposes and should not be taken as investment advice in any situation. The content of these pages should not be regarded as financial, investment, or any other form of advice. We caution that investing in cryptocurrencies can be risky and may lead to financial losses.“