The Supreme Court announced Tuesday that it will quickly take up a case that will decide whether President Trump has the power to impose sweeping global tariffs, agreeing to the administration’s request to hear its appeal.

Under the expedited schedule – agreed to by the small businesses and states challenging Trump’s rates –  the justices will hear oral arguments in the first week of November. 

The Trump administration urged the Supreme Court last week to take up the case and reverse an appeals court ruling that found most of the president’s tariffs were not covered by an emergency powers law.

Two lower courts also found that most of the levies on US trading partners were illegally imposed, but the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit allowed the tariffs to remain in place pending Trump’s petition to the high court. 

Democratic-led states and a coalition of small businesses contend that Trump illegally used the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to set tariffs on goods imported from virtually every country in the world – putting their businesses on the verge of bankruptcy. 

The president has imposed tariffs of up to 25% on Mexico and Canada and 10 to 20% on China, which he claims are necessary to get those nations to crack down on drug trafficking and illicit fentanyl shipments. 

Trump has also imposed 10% “reciprocal tariffs” on almost all imports, with certain countries subject to higher levies. 

The Court of International Trade struck down Trump’s use of IEEPA to impose the tariffs in May, and the Federal Circuit affirmed that ruling late last month. 

In its emergency appeal to the Supreme Court, the Trump administration argued that the US would be on “the brink of economic catastrophe” if the president was barred from unilaterally imposing the import taxes.  

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent warned the justices in a filing that the government could be forced to refund between $750 billion to $1 trillion in collected and projected tariff revenue if the Supreme Court finds the duties are illegal. 

“Unwinding them could cause significant disruption,” Bessent argued.

Trump has also used the threat of steep tariffs to negotiate new trade agreements with several countries – negotiations which Solicitor General John Sauer has argued lower court rulings are negatively affecting. 

A ruling against Trump’s tariffs may also impact the administration’s ability to halt the flow of fentanyl and efforts to end Russia’s war against Ukraine, Sauer claims.

The president’s so-called “Liberation Day” suite of tariffs will remain in effect pending the Supreme Court’s decision.