In a landmark decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has ruled that most of former President Donald Trump’s global tariffs were illegal, citing executive overreach. The 7-4 ruling concluded that Trump exceeded his authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), as no valid national emergency justified the sweeping trade measures.

The tariffs, which targeted billions of dollars in imported goods, were originally introduced to protect American workers and industries. While some of these duties—particularly on steel and aluminum—were spared in the ruling, the court made clear that the majority violated constitutional limits on presidential power.

Despite the ruling, the court allowed the tariffs to remain in place until October to give businesses and the government time to adjust. Trump has already vowed to take the case to the Supreme Court, framing the decision as an attack on his efforts to defend American jobs.

Reactions have been sharply divided. California Governor Gavin Newsom hailed the ruling as a “critical check on presidential authority,” while many of Trump’s supporters argue the tariffs offered long-overdue protection for U.S. industries. Economists suggest the ruling may help ease inflation by lowering import costs, though they warn it could create short-term turbulence in global markets.

This decision not only reshapes America’s trade policy but also underscores a larger debate about the balance of power between the executive branch and the courts. As the legal battle heads toward the nation’s highest court, the outcome could redefine how far a president can go in using emergency powers to reshape the economy.