On May 28, 2025, a federal court in the United States delivered a major blow to President Donald Trump’s sweeping “Liberation Day” tariffs, ruling that he had overstepped his authority by imposing tariffs on nearly all nations under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The court found these actions unconstitutional, emphasising that only Congress has the power to regulate foreign trade.

The India-Pakistan Ceasefire Claim

During the court hearings, the Trump administration made a controversial argument: that blocking the tariffs would risk escalating conflict between India and Pakistan, even suggesting that Trump’s tariff leverage had brokered a ceasefire between the two nuclear-armed neighbours. Top officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick, submitted statements supporting this narrative.

What Trump Claimed

Trump and his team asserted that a ceasefire between India and Pakistan, reached on May 10, 2025, was possible only because he offered both countries trading access to the US.

Trump publicly boasted that his intervention, using trade as leverage, averted a potential nuclear war.

The administration implied that limiting the president’s tariff powers could unravel this “tenuous” peace and endanger millions.

What Actually Happened

India categorically denied Trump’s claims. The Indian Ministry of External Affairs stated that the ceasefire was achieved through direct military channels and was not the result of US mediation or trade offers.

Indian officials clarified that the strength of India’s military response, not external pressure, compelled Pakistan to seek a halt in hostilities.

The court itself dismissed the administration’s argument, noting that the law does not permit the president to use tariffs as a tool for foreign policy in this manner.

The Court’s Ruling

The Manhattan-based International Trade Court ruled unanimously that Trump’s tariff orders exceeded his legal authority.

The court imposed a permanent injunction on all tariffs enacted under the IEEPA since January 2025.

The administration was ordered to issue new directives within ten days reflecting this injunction.

The Trump team immediately filed an appeal, challenging the court’s jurisdiction and authority.

Broader Impacts

The tariffs had already shaken global markets, disrupted trade, and risked a global recession.

Multiple lawsuits from states and small businesses challenged the legality and economic wisdom of Trump’s trade policies.

The administration’s attempt to justify tariffs using the India-Pakistan conflict was widely seen as a fabrication, with no support from India and little credibility in court.

Key Takeaways

Trump’s claim that his tariffs brokered peace between India and Pakistan has been debunked by both the Indian government and the US court.

The court’s decision reasserts Congressional authority over trade and limits presidential powers under emergency laws.

Attempts to use international conflicts as justification for sweeping economic measures were rejected both factually and legally.

This episode highlights the risks of conflating foreign policy crises with domestic economic tools for political gain.

In essence:

Trump’s assertion that his tariffs prevented war between India and Pakistan was a political manoeuvre unsupported by facts. The US court saw through this, blocking his tariff regime and reinforcing constitutional checks and balances. India’s own statements and the record of events show that the ceasefire was achieved independently of any US intervention or trade incentives.

Agencies