Former U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer has reaffirmed his strong support for President Donald Trump’s tariff-driven trade policy, stating that a recent ruling by the Supreme Court of the United States will not derail the administration’s broader economic agenda. In an interview with economist and television host Larry Kudlow, Lighthizer argued that Trump’s core belief that the old global trading system harmed American workers and slowed innovation remains unchanged.
He emphasized that President Trump has criticized the existing international trade framework for decades, even before entering politics, and believes it suppressed U.S. economic growth for over 30 years, reduced innovation, hurt wages and job creation, and negatively affected working-class Americans. According to Lighthizer, Trump’s commitment to reforming trade policy dates back to when he was in his mid-30s and has remained consistent throughout his career.
Lighthizer explained that the administration initially relied on AIPA and related emergency trade powers because they were simple and flexible tools for imposing tariffs. While he believes the president had a strong legal case, he admitted that there was always a risk of judicial pushback. He said the ruling was not unpredictable and added that the administration had already prepared alternative strategies. He praised current officials and legal experts for developing backup plans that would allow tariffs to continue under different legal authorities, even after the court’s decision.
Despite the ruling, Lighthizer insisted that tariffs will remain central to U.S. trade policy. He outlined a proportional approach under which countries with the worst trade practices will face higher tariffs, while friendly trading partners will receive more modest tariffs. The goal, he said, is to rebalance trade and protect domestic industry. According to him, this new tariff regime aims to strengthen manufacturing, boost wages, and restore America’s economic competitiveness.
Responding to concerns about economic growth, Lighthizer highlighted the relationship between trade deficits and GDP. He explained that trade deficits are directly subtracted from GDP calculations, meaning lower deficits can support economic growth. He pointed out that falling trade deficits in recent months have helped improve economic performance, while manufacturing activity is increasing and more manufacturing jobs are expected in the coming months. He argued that improved trade balances, combined with investment and deregulation, will drive long-term economic expansion.
Larry Kudlow strongly supported the administration’s policies and claimed that the U.S. economy is currently experiencing a major business investment boom. He credited reciprocal trade policies, deregulation, and major tax cuts, often referred to as the “one big beautiful bill,” for boosting investment and growth. Kudlow said recent weak GDP data was largely due to political disruptions and shutdown-related issues, not structural weakness in the economy. In his view, the overall economic environment remains strong and positive.
Both Kudlow and Lighthizer also defended Trump’s use of tariffs as part of his foreign policy strategy. Kudlow stated that trade measures are used hand in hand with diplomacy and questioned why courts should interfere with this approach. Lighthizer agreed, saying that trade tools are essential for negotiating better terms with other nations and protecting U.S. interests on the global stage.
Lighthizer described the Supreme Court’s ruling as technical and narrow in scope. While he disagreed with the outcome, he said most justices acted in good faith and were focused on legal interpretation rather than political motives. He expressed support for Justice Kavanaugh’s reasoning and dismissed claims that the decision was entirely political. However, he acknowledged that some liberal justices may have been influenced by political considerations.
One unresolved issue discussed in the interview was the handling of tariff revenues collected under the previous system. Kudlow criticized the court for not addressing whether these funds should be returned to businesses. Lighthizer responded that this matter was not directly before the court and would likely be resolved later through administrative or legal processes. He said he expects most of the money to be refunded, except in cases where companies may have forfeited their legal rights.
Lighthizer also urged Congress to play a more active role in trade reform. He said lawmakers should formally grant the president stronger authority to reshape U.S. trade policy. According to him, there is growing bipartisan recognition that the old trade system must change, and the court ruling could serve as an opportunity for legislative action.
Downplaying the impact of the ruling, Lighthizer described it as a very small bump in the road. He said the president still has the necessary tools to act, tariff policies will continue, and the real results will become clear over the next one to three years. He predicted that within five to ten years, people will focus more on how Trump’s policies helped American workers than on legal controversies surrounding trade authority.
Overall, the interview highlighted strong confidence among Trump’s economic allies that the administration’s trade agenda remains intact. Both Robert Lighthizer and Larry Kudlow argued that the old global trade system failed American workers, tariffs are essential for meaningful reform, legal challenges will not stop policy implementation, manufacturing and investment are rebounding, and Congress should reinforce presidential authority. They maintained that President Trump’s trade strategy is central to restoring U.S. economic strength and will ultimately gain wider acceptance if positive economic results continue.
This article is based on a public interview discussion and reflects the statements, opinions, and viewpoints expressed by the individuals involved. It is intended for informational and news reporting purposes only. The views mentioned do not necessarily reflect those of this publication. Readers are advised to conduct their own research before forming conclusions on economic or trade policy matters.
