A U.S. federal court on Wednesday blocked most of U.S. President Donald Trump's sweeping import tariffs from going into effect, ruling that the president had overstepped his authority with the across-the-board global levies.

The opinion marks a significant setback to the Republican leader as he bids to redraw the U.S. trading relationship with the world by forcing governments to the negotiating table through tough new levies.

Trump has made charging U.S. importers tariffs on goods from foreign countries the central policy of his ongoing trade wars, which have severely disrupted global trade flows and roiled financial markets.

But the three-judge Court of International Trade effectively called a ceasefire, barring most of the restrictions that the president has announced since taking office, including the "Liberation Day" tariffs he announced on April 2, with a baseline 10 percent, and tariffs he imposed against China, Mexico and Canada, designed to combat fentanyl coming into the U.S..

The court ruled that the U.S. Constitution grants Congress exclusive authority to regulate commerce and the president overstepped his authority by citing a "national emergency" to justify his tariffs.

It gave the White House 10 days to complete the bureaucratic process of halting the tariffs.

The White House slammed the ruling, arguing that "unelected judges" have no right to weigh in on Trump's actions to address what the administration frames as a "national emergency."

Multiple U.S. outlets said the Trump administration had already filed an appeal and questioned the authority of the court. 

The decisions of the Manhattan-based Court of International Trade, which hears disputes involving international trade and customs laws, can be appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C., and ultimately the U.S. Supreme Court.

A Chinese lawyer, who specializes in international trade dispute cases and asks to remain anonymous, told CGTN that the court ruling is not enough to constrain Trump, as the president has a lot administrative resources at his disposal, and his points of attack can be numerous.

"This time, he used emergency economic powers, and next time, he could use other executive orders," said the lawyer. Even if the government loses the case after Trump's appeal, it could still impose tariffs by using other tools, he said. 

"The U.S. used to emphasize rules, but Trump doesn't care about that. He uses his executive powers to counterbalance U.S. judicial authority and the rule of law. He is depleting America's reputation and soft power, while we just watch."

Trump tariffs are 'illegal abuse of executive power'

The ruling came in a pair of lawsuits, one filed by the nonpartisan Liberty Justice Center on behalf of five small U.S. businesses that import goods from countries targeted by the duties and the other by 13 U.S. states. At least five other legal challenges to the tariffs are pending.

"The question in the two cases before the court is whether the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 (IEEPA) delegates these powers to the president in the form of authority to impose unlimited tariffs on goods from nearly every country in the world," the three-judge panel wrote in an unsigned opinion.

The IEEPA authorizes the president to impose necessary economic sanctions during an emergency "to combat an unusual and extraordinary threat," the bench said.

Trump cited the IEEPA when he said trade deficits and the threat posed by the ingress of drugs into the United States justified widespread tariffs.

"The court does not read IEEPA to confer such unbounded authority and sets aside the challenged tariffs imposed thereunder," said the court.

The Justice Department has defended Trump's trade strategy in court, insisting that the judiciary has very limited authority over his actions and sparking criticism that the White House was attempting to usurp the power of the other branches of government.

After imposing tariffs in early April, the Trump administration escalated tensions by threatening to hit EU goods with a 50 percent tariff starting June 1. The administration cited stalled negotiations, declaring that talks with the bloc were "going nowhere" due to a lack of progress.

Analysts warn that the cost of the tariffs will likely be passed on to U.S. consumers, raising inflation and potentially leading the U.S. central bank to hold interest rates higher for longer, further impacting financial markets.

Gregory W. Meeks, the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said the ruling confirmed what had long been known – that "these tariffs are an illegal abuse of executive power."