U.S. President Donald Trump scored a temporary legal win on Thursday as a federal appeals court allowed his controversial tariffs on Chinese and other foreign imports to remain in place while ongoing legal challenges proceed.

The ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit temporarily reversed a lower court decision from the U.S. Court of International Trade, which had found that Trump overstepped his presidential authority in imposing wide-ranging tariffs during his time in office.

In response to the development, Trump slammed the trade court based in Manhattan, calling it “horrible” and demanding its earlier ruling be “quickly and decisively” overturned.

The trade measures, part of Trump’s broader effort to reshape U.S. economic relations with global partners, have long been a flashpoint in U.S. politics and international trade. His administration used tariffs as leverage to compel negotiations, notably with China, arguing that persistent trade deficits and illicit activities such as drug trafficking constituted a “national emergency.”

White House Defends Tariffs, Slams Judiciary

Reacting to Thursday’s decision, White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt accused the judges of “brazenly abusing their judicial power to usurp the authority of President Trump,” adding that the administration remained confident the tariff challenge would ultimately fail. She also said the president had other legal avenues to impose duties if necessary.

A separate federal court in Washington, D.C., also ruled that some of Trump’s tariffs were unlawful, giving the administration 14 days to file an appeal.

Mixed Legal Terrain and International Tensions

The rulings come amid growing legal scrutiny of the Trump administration’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) of 1977. The Court of International Trade had determined that the IEEPA does not grant the president “unlimited tariff authority,” a position echoed by several state governments and business coalitions that brought the lawsuits.

The decision had initially given the administration 10 days to halt several key tariffs before the appellate court issued a stay, pausing enforcement of that ruling.

The trade court’s original ruling struck down broad duties imposed on countries like China, Canada, and Mexico but left intact 25% tariffs on steel, aluminum, and imported automobiles.

Global Response and Trade Outlook

China, which has been a primary target of the tariffs including facing levies as high as 145% before they were temporarily reduced for negotiations welcomed the trade court’s initial ruling. Beijing urged the U.S. to fully remove what it called “unilateral and wrongful” tariff measures.

“China urges the United States to heed the rational voices from the international community and domestic stakeholders,” said commerce ministry spokeswoman He Yongqian.

Despite the legal uncertainty, senior Trump officials downplayed the impact on ongoing trade talks. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent admitted that negotiations with Beijing were “a bit stalled,” suggesting that a direct conversation between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping might be needed to break the deadlock.

Peter Navarro, Trump’s former trade advisor, said the administration had received “plenty of phone calls from countries” willing to continue discussions in good faith, though he did not name any.

Kevin Hassett, director of the National Economic Council, dismissed the court rulings as “hiccups” from “activist judges,” adding that several new trade agreements were nearing completion.

Analysts: Supreme Court Showdown Likely

Analysts at Capital Economics, a London-based research firm, noted that the legal battles are unlikely to spell the end of the tariff war. The matter may ultimately be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court, which could set a lasting precedent on the scope of presidential power under the IEEPA.

For now, Trump’s tariff regime survives but the final outcome remains uncertain as the legal and political fights continue.