Markets 
President Donald Trump blasted two Supreme Court justices that he appointed as “bad for our country” after they sided with the majority in a ruling that undercut his tariff agenda.
The criticism follows a Supreme Court decision last month that blocked his use of an emergency law to impose sweeping tariffs.
By a 6–3 vote, the majority concluded that the law cited to justify the import duties “does not authorize the President to impose tariffs.”
Speaking at a National Republican Congressional Committee dinner in Washington, D.C., Trump expressed frustration with Justices Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett, though he did not mention them by name.
BLACKROCK CEO SAYS TRUMP ACCOUNTS COULD BE A ‘VERY SIGNIFICANT STEP’ FOR YOUNG AMERICANS
“Bad courts in this country are costing us a tremendous amount of money,” Trump said. “The Supreme Court, that’s right, of the United States, cost our country — all they needed was a sentence — our country hundreds of billions of dollars, and they couldn’t care less. They couldn’t care less.”
Without naming names, Trump then took aim at Gorsuch and Barrett, whom he appointed, and said they “sicken” him.
“Two of the people that voted for that, I appointed and they sicken me,” Trump said. “They sicken me because they’re bad for our country.”
WILL THE FEDERAL RESERVE CUT INTEREST RATES IN 2026?
Trump has previously targeted the court, especially the six members who voted against him.
The president said he was “ashamed of certain members of the court, absolutely ashamed, for not having the courage to do what’s right for the country.”
During an event hosted earlier this month by Rice University, Chief Justice John Roberts — who delivered the opinion of the court — warned against personal criticism of federal judges, citing an increase in “dangerous” and hostile rhetoric.
COSTCO SUED BY CUSTOMER SEEKING REFUNDS FOR TARIFF PAYMENTS
Roberts stressed the difference between criticizing a court order or legal analysis and personally attacking the judge behind it.
“It’s important that our decisions are subjected to scrutiny, and they are,” Roberts said.
“The problem is that sometimes the criticism can move from a focus on legal analysis to personalities. And you see from all over, I mean, not just any one political perspective on it, that it’s more directed in a personal way. And that, frankly, can actually be quite dangerous.”
GOLD TRUMP COIN MOVES FORWARD AFTER TREASURY INVOKES RARE AUTHORITY
The case centered on whether the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) gave the president authority to impose the tariffs or if the move crossed constitutional limits.
The dispute stems from Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs last April, a sweeping package aimed at addressing trade imbalances and reducing reliance on foreign goods.
Tariff revenue has surged in the wake of the policy.
Duties jumped from $9.6 billion in March to $23.9 billion in May. For fiscal 2025, collections reached $215.2 billion, according to Treasury data, and receipts have continued to climb into fiscal 2026.
Since the ruling, Trump announced a 10% global tariff under Section 122, “above our normal tariffs already being charged.”
FOX Business’ Amanda Macias, Breanne Deppisch and Bill Mears contributed to this report.
Read the full article here
