Saturday, March 29, 2025
In a dramatic legal and diplomatic development, the U.S. government has linked the India-Pakistan ceasefire to former President Donald Trump’s controversial tariff measures. The claim emerged during a federal court hearing on the legality of Trump’s sweeping tariffs, which a U.S. trade court has now declared unconstitutional.
According to court documents filed on May 24, senior U.S. officials — including Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio — argued that Trump’s use of emergency economic powers under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) was not just a trade maneuver but a diplomatic intervention aimed at preventing war.
In a striking admission, Lutnick claimed that “a full-scale war between India and Pakistan was only averted after President Trump offered both nations trading access to the United States in return for a ceasefire.” The U.S. administration credited its tariff-linked diplomacy with de-escalating tensions that followed India’s Operation Sindoor and Pakistan’s retaliatory threats in April 2025.
However, the U.S. Court of International Trade in Manhattan sharply rejected these justifications. A three-judge panel ruled that the President had exceeded his constitutional authority by unilaterally imposing tariffs, emphasizing that only Congress has the power to regulate foreign trade. The court stated, “The Constitution does not grant the President limitless power over international commerce, even in emergencies.”
Trump had imposed a blanket 10% tariff on imports from several nations on April 2, including China and the European Union. While some of these duties were suspended due to market panic, the administration continued to justify the move as a national security measure. By mid-May, a temporary tariff rollback was announced for Chinese imports, coinciding with a 90-day diplomatic cooling-off period.
The court dismissed the administration’s argument that strategic aims — including managing military drills, export of hazardous materials, and global acquisitions — warranted such tariffs. It concluded the law did not permit economic measures as wide-ranging as those imposed by Trump.
White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller lashed out at the ruling, calling it a “judicial coup” on social media. Shortly after the decision, the Trump team announced its intention to appeal.
This marks the first time the U.S. government has officially admitted using trade incentives to influence South Asian security outcomes. The revelation adds a new dimension to debates over the separation of powers and the true reach of executive authority during international crises.
