In Simple, Stark Terms, Trump Lays Out Why the SCOTUS Ruling on Universal Injunctions Was So Critical – RedState

President Donald Trump is not a lawyer. He’s a businessman, a showman, and (now) a politician. But he’s no stranger to litigation, and he understands as well as anyone the importance of court rulings regarding actions taken by his administration — and, in particular, the critical nature of the Supreme Court’s Friday ruling regarding universal injunctions. 

The president sat down for a wide-ranging interview with “Sunday Morning Futures” host Maria Bartiromo. They covered foreign relations, the recent strikes on Iran, the One Big Beautiful Bill  — a whole host of topics. But it was Trump’s comments regarding Friday’s Supreme Court ruling and the ongoing litigation regarding tariffs that caught my attention. 

Part 1 of the interview may be viewed in full below, but here’s the excerpt I wanted to focus on:

.@POTUS: “If some judge said we can’t do tariffs, we would fall prey to the rest of the world who would do tariffs, and are doing tariffs, on us … This country would be in terrible shape. We would be like this innocent lamb being led to slaughter.” pic.twitter.com/sM7KJ7mGsN

— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) June 29, 2025

RELATED: Big: Supreme Court Rules on Nationwide Injunctions in Birthright Citizenship Cases

Justice Barrett Rightfully Blasts Justice Jackson’s Dangerous Rejection of Constitutional Order

Bartiromo began by asking specifically about the litigation regarding the tariffs (an issue that hasn’t yet made its way to the Supreme Court but has resulted in some favorable rulings for the administration at the appellate court level and which may well be informed by Friday’s ruling). 

BARTIROMO: There is litigation around the legality of those tariffs. Are you going to be able to get more trade deals done before you hear from the International Court of Appeals [Federal Circuit Court of Appeals] in August? 

TRUMP: Sure. But we won the litigation, and we had the delay, and we had some radical left judge, and then we got it overturned. And we’re doing well on all of our litigation — we’re doing well on the tariff litigation. Look, if some judge said we can’t do tariffs, we would fall prey to the rest of the world, who would do tariffs and are doing tariffs on us. If we couldn’t fight them back with tariffs, this country would be in terrible shape — we would be like this innocent lamb being led to slaughter. 

Bartiromo then turned to Friday’s Supreme Court victory in particular and whether it might have an impact on the tariff litigation.

BARTIROMO: The Supreme Court victory that you got…Friday, do you think that could apply to the tariff litigation that’s pending here, in terms of the legality of your tariffs? Does that affect that at all?

TRUMP: It could, but again, the tariff litigation, if you look at it, there are alternatives if we have to use them — they’re not as good because they’re not as direct; they’re not as biting, but they’re very good, so that you have alternatives. But we want to use this particular asset, this particular grouping, this — the words of this [ruling] are so beautiful, they were meant for it. But what happens with the tariffs is that if a judge ruled against us — and this is part of how you win — fairness — fairness is also a part of the law — if a judge ruled against us on tariffs, we would fall prey to other countries destroying us. We can’t do that. If they do tariffs on us, we do tariffs on them. If they charge us, we charge them. Then they never charge us. 

The bolded portions of Trump’s comments strike at the heart of the issue with so many of the lower court rulings we’ve been seeing regarding executive actions taken by the administration. Yes, the courts serve a vital role in our government, and they need to be available for challenges against government action. But far too many judges have allowed their fervor to put Trump in check to cloud their judgment as to what are, in fact, legal actions taken by the executive and which lanes are reserved for the respective branches of government. 

Judges aren’t elected, and they aren’t authorized to conduct foreign policy or many other functions that are specifically reserved to the executive. That doesn’t change simply because they don’t like the person who’s holding that office. Trump is exactly right to highlight the pitfalls of judicial overreach and to be optimistic that the Supreme Court, with Friday’s ruling, may have helped set a much-needed course correction for the judiciary.

Watch Part 1 of @MariaBartiromo‘s interview with @POTUS where they discuss Iran, the future of the Abraham Accords, the threat of China, Trump’s victory at NATO, and his win in the Supreme Court: pic.twitter.com/dVJuTrWDDK

— SundayMorningFutures (@SundayFutures) June 29, 2025

Editor’s Note: Partisan federal judges are hijacking President Trump’s agenda and insulting the will of the people

Help us expose out-of-control judges dead set on halting President Trump’s mandate for change. Join RedState VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your membership.