US Federal Court of Appeal temporarily frozen the decision that annulled the duties imposed by US President Donald Trump, giving time to examine whether there would be a more permanent suspension of the decision.

The order was issued on Thursday by the federal Court of Appeal of the Region, which will examine the case in depth.

In a brief ruling on Thursday, the US Federal Court of Appeal on the Washington District announced that it is temporarily freezing the judgment of the Court of Justice of International Trade issued on Wednesday until further legal arguments were examined.

This mandate, known as administrative suspension, is not a decision on the substance of the case, but is often used in emergencies.

The Court of Appeal asked the group of companies who insulted the duties to deposit a written memorandum by June 5, in which they would quote their arguments, and gave a deadline until June 9 to the Ministry of Justice to respond.

The suspension was issued while the Trump government was eagerly seeking to “freeze” the ruling, warning that if necessary it would appeal to the Supreme Court before the end of the week.

Earlier on Thursday, the Ministry of Justice had submitted a formal request to the Federal Court of Appeal, calling for suspension of the court’s judgment of the International Trade Court as it is proceeding with the appeal.

“This court must immediately suspend the ruling, which finds legal errors and overturns President Trump’s efforts to eliminate our huge commercial deficit and redefine the global economy on an equal basis,” the justice ministry said.

“Unless there is at least temporary relief from this court, the United States intends to seek urgent intervention by the Supreme Court tomorrow in order to avoid irreparable damage to national security and the economy,” he added.

Earlier, White House spokeswoman Caroline Levit said on Thursday that “there is a worrying and dangerous tendency to interfere with presidential decisions. America cannot work if President Trump – or any other president – sees sensitive diplomatic and trade negotiations undermined by activist judges. “

Levit stressed that the government would exhaust all the remedies, adding that “in the end, the Supreme Court must put an end to this situation for the good of the Constitution and our country.”

Trump supported much of his policy on duties imposed by citing the 1977 International Emergency Emergency Law (IEEPA). He imposed duties on Canada, Mexico and China due to Lathremporos Fentanyl, to countermeasures on almost all US traders.

However, a three -member composition of the Court of Justice in New York in New York ruled on Wednesday that Trump did not have the power to impose such duties based on IEPA.

“The court does not evaluate the correctness or effectiveness of the president’s implementation of duties. Their application is not allowed not because they are unfortunate or ineffective, but because IEepa does not allow it, “the judges said.

At the same time, on Thursday, a federal judge in Washington, Rudolf Contra, agreed by the above decision, stressing that neither the letter of the law nor its historical application allow the use of IEEpa to impose such a wide form of duties.

“In the fifty years since IEEpa’s adoption, no president has so far been invoked for the imposition of duties,” he wrote.