Axios Updated 7 hours ago - Economy Blocking tariffs would be "end of the United States," top Trump adviser says Ben Berkowitz

 Axios

Updated 7 hours ago -

Economy

Blocking tariffs would be "end of the United States," top Trump adviser says

Ben Berkowitz

Man in a dark suit standing in front of the White House, draped in U.S. flags.

White House trade adviser Peter Navarro. Photo: Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

It would be "the end of the United States" if President Trump's sweeping global tariffs are ultimately struck down by the Supreme Court, White House trade adviser Peter Navarro said Sunday.

Why it matters: The administration is putting maximum pressure on the high court — and the court of public opinion — in an attempt to frame the future of Trump's trade regime in existential terms.

Catch up quick: Late Friday night, a federal appellate court upheld a lower-court ruling that Trump's sweeping global tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) were illegal.

Trump quickly warned the ruling could "literally destroy the United States" and suggested a Supreme Court appeal was coming.

The decision allows the IEEPA tariffs to remain in place through at least Oct. 14. It does not affect so-called Section 232 tariffs (like steel and aluminum) or Section 301 national tariffs (like the levies imposed on China in Trump's first term).

What they're saying: "This was weaponized partisan injustice at its worst. Politicians in black robes," Navarro said on Fox's "Sunday Morning Futures" of the court's 7-4 decision.

"If we lose the case, President Trump is right — it will be the end of the United States," he said

Navarro insisted that both fentanyl flows from overseas and trade deficits were emergencies that had to be addressed by tariffs, and that the duties could end quickly if the drugs stopped coming and trade balanced out.

By the numbers: Tariffs have quickly become a massive source of federal revenue — around $31 billion in August alone, representing just over 8% of all cash deposits to the U.S. Treasury for the month.

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimated that the ruling, if it stands, would wipe out 71% of the revenue impact of Trump's tariff policy, reducing receipts by $2 trillion through fiscal 2034.

Between the lines: Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.), a member of the Senate Finance Committee, told NBC's "Meet the Press" on Sunday that the ongoing tariff drama was disruptive to businesses and needed to be resolved, one way or another.

"More than anything else, from all the companies that I talk to, is they just want it to be set. They just want to know what the rules of the road are," Lankford said.

"Every time there's a new court hearing, every time there's a new change, it's destabilizing for every one of our businesses. So let's get all these things resolved as quickly as we possibly can."

His comments echo those of trade groups, from the top of American industry to the smallest of businesses, who've said the lingering uncertainty is disrupting their ability to operate.

What to watch: How quickly the Trump administration moves to bring the case to the Supreme Court, whose next term is likely to face multiple fundamental questions about presidential authority over the economy.

Editor's note: This story has been updated with comments from Sen. Lankford.