The Trump administration said it could immediately ask the U.S. Supreme Court to immediately suspend federal court rulings to block many tariffs by President Donald Trump.

It will say in a filing filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Thursday morning that the U.S. will seek “emergency relief” from the U.S. Supreme Court to avoid irreparable national security and economic harms. ”

But the government said it would take this step only after the federal appeals court did not issue a temporary pause in a speedy tariff ruling.

"The Supreme Court must end this," White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told three judges Thursday afternoon.

Levitt claimed in a press conference that the judges “boldly abused their judicial power to usurp President Trump’s powers to prevent him from performing the tasks given to him by the American people.”

“These judges threaten to undermine the credibility of the United States on the world stage,” she added.

Her comment is the latest Salvo from the Trump administration’s U.S. Court of International Trade panel, whose ruling has dealt a major blow to the president’s trade agenda.

The Trump administration also asked the Trade Circuit judge to stop any enforcement of its ruling when appealing.

Later Thursday, in another case in Washington, D.C., a federal judge also announced that many of Trump's tariffs were illegal.

"We live under the leadership of judicial autocracy," White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller wrote Thursday morning.

Top trade adviser Peter Navarro accused the court of being a "globalist" and a "pro-shock" on Bloomberg TV on Thursday, claiming it was biased against the government's tariff policy.

"We have these unelected judges trying to force their will in terms of tax policy, trade policy and all economic matters," Trump adviser Jason Miller said in a Fox Business interview Thursday morning.

The three judges - Jane Restani, Timothy Reif and Gary Katzmann were appointed federal judges by two Republicans, Ronald Reagan and President Trump and Barack Obama, a Democrat.

The Trump administration slammed the judicial panel’s ruling in a court lawsuit Thursday, saying “it depends on a flawed explanation of the dangers of the president’s tariff authorities.”

The government said the Trade Court also "had made mistakes in guessing the president needed these tariffs to resolve his declared national emergency."

Wednesday's ruling led Trump to impose dozens of country-specific tariffs under the authority of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act earlier this year.

The judge believes that the law does not have “unlimited powers granted to the president.”

Their national permanent neighborhoods cover all retaliatory tariffs issued by Trump in early April, part of his sweeping Liberation Day plan to reshape international trade with the rest of the world.

The ruling also prohibits the government from making any future changes to the tariffs. The court made 10 days to the government to make the necessary changes to execute the order.

Shortly after the verdict dropped, the Trump administration filed a notice of appeal.

Trump and other defendants in the case also asked the Trade Court to stop enforcing its ruling when the appeal proceedings proceed.

"For the country's national security and the president's actions ongoing, subtle diplomatic efforts, it is crucial for the court to maintain its judgment," wrote Justice Department attorney Sosun Bae.

Bae noted that U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent all warned that the ruling would "destroy" a preliminary trade deal with China earlier this month and raised questions.

If the Trade Court ruling survives an upcoming appeal, it could deal a major blow to Trump’s economic agenda.

Tariffs and trade protectionism are the backbone of the president's worldview. Recently, he has tended toward tariff commitments to generate federal revenue when seeking to cut taxes and increase military spending.

However, at the same time, Trump has other means to unilaterally impose import taxes.

Goldman Sachs economists point out that three relatively obscure parts of U.S. trade law will soon work: Sections 122 and 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, and Section 338 of the Trade Act of 1930.

Navarro expressed optimism about the government's choice on Thursday.

“Any trade lawyer knows we can only take many different options,” he said. “In law, we can do a great job.”

"So, in this sense, nothing really changed."