Trump says US SC justices should be ‘loyal’ after ruling against tariffs; claims ‘tiny’ sentence could have saved $159 bn

WASHINGTON: US President Donald Trump on Sunday (local time) criticised the Supreme Court over its recent ruling against his tariffs, saying some Republican-appointed Justices had failed to remain “loyal” and warning that future decisions, including on birthright citizenship, could harm the country. He also said that by adding a “‘tiny’ sentence” in the ruling of not paying back the money, the country could have saved $159 billion.

In a lengthy post on Truth Social, Trump singled out Justices Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett for voting against his administration’s position on tariffs. He said, “I “Love” Justice Neil Gorsuch! He’s a really smart and good man, but he voted against me, and our Country, on Tariffs, a devastating move. Referring to Barrett, Trump added, “I have, likewise, always liked and respected Amy Coney Barrett, but the same thing with her. They were appointed by me, and yet have hurt our Country so badly!”

President Trump posts on TruthSocial: I “Love” Justice Neil Gorsuch! He’s a really smart and good man, but he voted against me, and our Country, on Tariffs, a devastating move.

How do I reconcile this? So bad, and hurtful to our Country. I have, likewise, always liked and… pic.twitter.com/qry96EO2o1

— Donald J Trump Posts TruthSocial (@TruthTrumpPost) May 11, 2026

Trump claimed the court’s tariff decision “cost the United States 159 Billion Dollars that we have to pay back to enemies, and people, companies, and Countries, that have been ripping us off for years.”

He argued that the court could have avoided the financial impact through a “‘tiny’ sentence” in the ruling. He said, “They could have solved that situation with a “tiny” sentence, ‘Any money paid by others to the United States does not have to be paid back.” Why wouldn’t they have done so?”

In an earlier Truth Social post, Trump repeated the same argument, saying, “Any money paid to the United States of America does not have to be paid back” — That sentence, if added by the Supreme Court to its highly disputed Tariff decision, would have saved America 159 Billion Dollars!”

Trump also complained that Republican-appointed justices often attempt to demonstrate independence by ruling against him. “Democrat Justices always remain true to the people that honored them for that very special Nomination,” he said. “They don’t waver, no matter how good or bad a case may be, but Republican Justices often go out of their way to oppose me, because they want to show how “independent” or, “above it all,” they are.”

While saying, “it’s really OK for them to be loyal to the person that appointed them to “almost” the highest position in the land, that is, a Justice of the United States Supreme Court,” he added later, “I don’t want loyalty, but I do want and expect it for our Country.”

The US President also warned that the court could next rule against his position on birthright citizenship. He said, “they will be ruling against us on Birthright Citizenship, making us the only Country in the World that practices this unsustainable, unsafe, and incredibly costly disaster.”

He further argued that “a negative ruling on Birthright Citizenship, on top of the recent Supreme Court Tariff catastrophe, is not Economically sustainable for the United States of America!”

The ambitious trade agenda of the Trump administration had encountered a fresh legal hurdle as a federal court on Thursday (local time) declared the 10 per cent blanket tariffs unlawful, marking a significant defeat for the President’s cornerstone economic strategy, CNN reported.

In a split 2-1 decision, a judicial panel at the US Court of International Trade determined that the government failed to provide adequate legal grounds to implement the levies under Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act. This particular set of tariffs was introduced as a replacement after a Supreme Court intervention earlier this year struck down an even more extensive series of duties.

According to CNN, the court’s directive requires the administration to immediately halt the collection of these duties from the plaintiffs involved in the case and to issue refunds for previous payments. While the ruling currently only shields the specific companies that brought the lawsuit, it represents a profound blow to the administration’s ability to unilaterally reshape trade through executive action.

The ongoing legal battles underscore the atmosphere of “chaos and uncertainty” surrounding the administration’s economic direction. Following the Supreme Court’s February decision that a broad portion of the initial tariffs were illegal, the President pivoted to these now-disputed global duties, relying on the then-untested authority of the 1974 Act.

As reported by CNN, the landscape for businesses remains volatile. Although importers are now eligible to seek refunds for payments made under the tariffs previously invalidated by the Supreme Court, the reimbursement process is expected to be slow and tiered. Furthermore, the timeline for the full opening of the refund system remains murky, and payments could face additional delays if the administration introduces new measures that alter the calculation of these returns. (ANI)