Following the Supreme Court's ruling that President Donald Trump violated federal law with his unilateral imposition of broad tariffs on multiple countries, Trump criticized the justices involved in the decision, which included two judges he appointed himself. The Court, comprising nine justices, ruled six in favor of the decision and three against it, highlighting the stark division within the judiciary regarding the legality of Trump's tariffs.

Republican commentator Peter Huff, in an interview with Al Jazeera, asserted that the ruling debunks the liberal narrative that all of Trump's judges are beholden to him, emphasizing that the principle of judicial independence remains intact and robust. However, he raised concerns about lower courts where left-leaning judges prioritize their opposition to Trump's agenda over the law, suggesting that this undermines the rule of law.

Additionally, Huff pointed out that the tariff ruling is particularly significant as it is based on a narrow interpretation of a federal law by three justices known for their belief that context does not matter, especially in relation to fundamental rights as outlined in the U.S. Constitution. This ongoing conflict between Trump and the judicial system raises questions about the future of U.S. trade policy and judicial independence.