The Trump tariff war heads to the U.S. Supreme Court, what will happen next? What are the key moments?

A legal storm regarding the trade powers of the U.S. President is escalating. According to CCTV News, on August 29 local time, the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that most of the global tariff policies implemented by President Trump are illegal. The court stated that these tariff measures can remain in effect until October 14, allowing the U.S. government to appeal to the Supreme Court. This ruling is a severe judicial rebuke of the current administration's core economic policies and directly brings the conflict to the U.S. Supreme Court. Although the ruling has been stayed until October 14, giving the White House time to appeal, it undoubtedly casts a thick layer of uncertainty over the U.S. trade strategy. How will this critical legal challenge evolve? Does the White House have other options in its "toolbox"? Key Timeline of the Legal Battle: Focus on October 14 According to media reports, the direction of this legal showdown will become clearer in the coming weeks. The White House submitted an expedited appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court on September 3. The next key date is October 14, when the stay issued by the Court of Appeals will expire. If the Supreme Court does not intervene before this date, the ruling from August 29 will take effect, and tariffs based on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) will automatically become void. Additionally, rulings from other circuit courts may also impact the situation. The Ninth Circuit Court and the D.C. Circuit Court, which is considered friendly to Trump, will hear related cases on September 17 and September 30, respectively. If there is a "circuit split" that contradicts the Court of Appeals, it will significantly increase the pressure on the Supreme Court to take up the case. If the Supreme Court decides to hear the case, oral arguments may take place in the fourth quarter of 2025, with a final ruling expected in the first quarter of 2026. The "Plan B" for Tariff Policy Even with limited use of the IEEPA, the Trump administration still has other tools to maintain tariff pressure. Analysts suggest that the government may turn to the following legal authorizations: Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act: Allows tariffs to be imposed on "strategic industries" such as steel, chips, electric vehicle batteries, and pharmaceuticals under the justification of "national security." Section 122 of the Trade Act: Allows the President to impose tariffs of up to 15% on all imported goods in emergencies, for a maximum of 150 days. Section 338 of the Tariff Act: Allows for the implementation of retaliatory tariffs of up to 50% after an investigation. Section 301 of the Trade Act. Analysts point out that even if the Supreme Court ultimately rules against the White House, the Trump administration may still compensate for an expected revenue loss of about $150 billion by selectively escalating tariffs. Potential Winners and Losers According to analysis from investment research firm TS Lombard, the outcome of this legal battle will create different winners and losers If the Supreme Court ultimately restricts the president's tariff powers, large retailers such as Amazon and Walmart will emerge as winners, as lower tariffs mean reduced import costs and more competitive pricing. Exporters from Vietnam, ASEAN, as well as Brazil and India, who have previously been affected by high tariffs, may also see some easing of trade barriers. For the market, the limitation on presidential powers is expected to create a positive backdrop for both the U.S. and global stock markets. On the other hand, losers may include the U.S. bond market, as the reduction in tariff revenue will exacerbate an already strained fiscal deficit. Additionally, even if IEEPA tariffs are lifted, tariffs targeting U.S. strategic industries such as semiconductors, electric vehicles, pharmaceuticals, and steel may still persist, causing volatility in related supply chains. The global shipping and logistics industry will also face new compliance hurdles and unpredictable costs due to fragmented trade policies. Risk Warning and Disclaimer The market carries risks, and investments should be made cautiously. This article does not constitute personal investment advice and does not take into account the specific investment objectives, financial situation, or needs of individual users. Users should consider whether any opinions, views, or conclusions in this article are suitable for their specific circumstances. Investment based on this is at one's own risk