Trump trade adviser blasts tariff ruling

White House trade advisor Peter Navarro speaks to members of the media near the West Wing of the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., August 21, 2025.

Nathan Howard | Reuters

President Donald Trump’s trade adviser Peter Navarro said Sunday that “it will be the end of the United States” if the president’s sweeping tariffs are ultimately blocked by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Navarro’s comments echoed Trump’s own rhetoric as the president sharply criticized last week’s 7-4 appeals court decision, which ruled that most of Trump’s tariffs are illegal, placing a central tenet of the administration’s economic agenda on shaky ground.

The final ruling on the matter is likely to be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. As the battle over Trump’s tariffs intensifies, the president’s advisers are casting the ultimate outcome as pivotal to the future of the country.

This was weaponized partisan injustice at its worst,” Navarro said on Fox’s “Sunday Morning Futures.”

“If we lose the case, President Trump is right. It will be the end of the United States,” he said.

Navarro also said that he feels “very optimistic” about the administration’s arguments to the Supreme Court.

“A very good dissent provides a road map for the Supreme Court. We feel very optimistic,” Navarro said.

The White House did not immediately respond to CNBC’s request to comment.

Read more CNBC politics coverage

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held Friday that Trump overstepped his presidential authority when he invoked the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act to justify the sweeping “reciprocal” tariffs against virtually every country in the world.

The appeals court allowed Trump’s tariffs to stay in effect until Oct. 14, giving the Trump administration time to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court.

“If these Tariffs ever went away, it would be a total disaster for the Country,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social after the ruling.

He added that “with the help of the United States Supreme Court, we will use [tariffs] to the benefit of our Nation, and Make America Rich, Strong, and Powerful Again!”

Without court action, Trump’s tariffs were set to affect roughly 69% of U.S. goods imports, according to the Tax Foundation, but if blocked, the duties would impact just roughly 16%.

Parts of Trump’s agenda remain safe from Friday’s court decision. Most notably, his sector-specific levies on steel and aluminum remain unaffected by the appeals court’s ruling.

Visited 1 times, 1 visit(s) today

Related Article

Bill Gates, RFK Jr. 'Agreed to Disagree' on Vaccines, Gates Says

By Jennifer Rigby NEW YORK (Reuters) -Philanthropist and Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates met once with U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. since he took office, and the two “agreed to disagree” about vaccines, Gates told Reuters in an interview on Monday. Kennedy has long promoted doubts …

In a dizzying few days, Trump ramps up attacks on political opponents and 1st Amendment

WASHINGTON — President Trump has harnessed the weight of his office in recent days to accelerate a campaign of retribution against his perceived political enemies and attacks on 1st Amendment protections. In the last week alone, Trump replaced a U.S. attorney investigating two of his political adversaries with a loyalist and openly directed the attorney general to

Jonathan Bailey, Naomi Campbell and more celebrities

Burberry’s spring/summer 2026 show for London Fashion Week on Sept. 22 show brought out super stylish looks from Jonathan Bailey, Naomi Campbell, Rosie Huntington-Whiteley and more. Below, see what everyone wore. 1 of 24 Rosie Huntington-Whiteley Dave Benett/Getty Images for Burberry 2 of 24 Jonathan Bailey Alan Chapman/Dave Benett/Getty Images for Burberry 3 of 24

Wall Street Journal Seeks Dismissal Of Trump’s Defamation Lawsuit

The Wall Street Journal, its parent company and Rupert Murdoch asked a federal judge to dismiss Donald Trump‘s $10 billion defamation lawsuit over the publication’s report on the president’s past connections to Jeffrey Epstein. “In an affront to the First Amendment, the President of the United States brought this lawsuit to silence a newspaper for