US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick has publicly defended President Donald Trump’s aggressive use of tariff powers, calling them a strategic tool to achieve global “justice” and to pressure nations such as India to stop purchasing Russian oil. Lutnick’s remarks came during an interview with Fox News on Thursday, as the US Supreme Court heard oral arguments on the legality of Trump’s tariff actions under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).
“The President is using these taxes to buy justice,” Lutnick said, arguing that tariffs were not merely economic instruments but levers of diplomacy aimed at reshaping global behavior. “He is using the tariffs to end the war in Russia and Ukraine, where he has told India, ‘stop buying oil,’” the Commerce Secretary added.
The Supreme Court proceedings center on whether Trump lawfully invoked IEEPA—typically reserved for national security crises—to impose sweeping reciprocal tariffs on multiple countries, including India, China, and several European allies. Critics contend that Trump overstepped the statute’s intent by using emergency powers to enact broad trade measures unrelated to direct national emergencies.
Lutnick dismissed such concerns, insisting that restricting presidential tariff authority would undermine US leverage abroad. “These powers protect America,” he said. “Limiting them would weaken the President’s ability to make the world and the United States a safer place.”
Under Trump’s directive, India was hit with a 25 percent reciprocal tariff on exports to the United States, along with an additional 25 percent duty tied specifically to its continued purchase of discounted Russian crude oil. The combined 50 percent levy marked one of the highest trade penalties imposed by Washington on a strategic partner.
India called the move “unfair, unjustified, and unreasonable,” maintaining that its energy policy is driven by national interest and the need to ensure affordable and stable fuel supplies. Despite US pressure, New Delhi has continued buying Russian oil through rupee-ruble and dirham-denominated transactions, though it has sought to diversify its sources.
In a September filing, the Trump administration told the Supreme Court that the tariffs were part of “a necessary response to a pre-existing national emergency stemming from Russia’s aggression in Ukraine.” The White House argued that penalizing India for purchasing Russian crude was a “crucial aspect” of the administration’s broader strategy to isolate Moscow and accelerate peace efforts.
Trump himself has repeatedly claimed that India has privately assured Washington it will “significantly reduce” its Russian oil imports. However, Indian officials have neither confirmed nor denied this assertion, reiterating that all decisions on energy procurement are guided by domestic priorities, not external pressure.
Lutnick’s remarks come amid growing debate in Washington over the future scope of presidential tariff powers. If the Supreme Court were to curtail the president’s authority under IEEPA, it could have far-reaching implications for US foreign policy, limiting the executive branch’s flexibility to impose unilateral trade measures without congressional approval.
For now, Trump’s administration has framed the tariffs as part of a broader effort to “rebalance” global trade and assert economic dominance, arguing that such tools are essential for confronting adversaries and influencing allies alike. As the court deliberates, the case could become a defining moment for the future of presidential economic powers — and for Washington’s ability to blend trade policy with foreign strategy.
