Trade Court Rules Most Trump Tariffs Illegal

Download PDF

The U.S. Court of International Trade (USCIT or the Court) has ruled most of President Trump’s tariffs illegal, finding he exceeded his authority in imposing sweeping tariffs on China and global trading partners based on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The three-judge panel granted summary judgment motions by twelve states and a handful of small businesses, after attributing the Constitution’s express tariff power to Congress, contrasted to the President’s limited authority under a national emergency: “…we do not read IEEPA to delegate an unbounded tariff authority to the president…We instead read IEEPA’s provisions to impose meaningful limits on any such authority it confers.” (See USCIT Slip Opinion 25-66). The Court vacated most of the Trump tariffs, and gave up to ten days for the President to terminate the tariff collections process.

The Court’s ruling negated the prior fentanyl and trafficking tariffs on Mexican, Canadian and Chinese products as well as the added duties on Chinese products; and global 10 percent tariffs on all countries until the July 9th due date for the President’s country-specific “reciprocal” tariffs. The imposition of these tariffs had been paused, according to the President, to drive countries to make trade deals with the Administration. Thus far, only the UK has reached a framework for a deal with the US, though the ten percent baseline tariff continues to be a sticking point in the ongoing negotiations. The USCIT’s ruling has the potential to upset the President’s trade agenda, making chances for the President’s “90 deals in 90 days” highly unlikely. It also casts doubt on future negotiations with France, whose representatives have been in Washington recently, in response to President Trump’s threatened 50 percent tariffs on EU goods.

Unaffected by the Court’s ruling are normal customs duties and Section 301 tariffs as well as existing tariffs on steel, aluminum and cars—the last three imposed under the authority of Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. Section 232 tariffs may be imposed after investigations by the Secretary of Commerce as to whether imported products pose a threat to national security, who then makes recommendations to the President. The President has threatened tariffs on pharmaceuticals and semiconductors.

Given the impact of the Court’s ruling, the Department of Justice quickly filed a notice of appeal to the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (USCAFC). Just hours after the appeal was filed, a panel of the USCAFC issued a short opinion that temporarily stays the lower court’s orders and injunctions – just long enough for the plaintiffs and the Administration to complete a shortened briefing schedule that ends on June 9, 2025. After that, the USCAFC will take up the issue itself. News reports suggest that the Trump Administration is already preparing an emergency appeal to the US Supreme Court.  For the present, however, a potentially serious shadow has been cast on the President’s tariffs. Absent action by Congress to reclaim its tariff authority under existing trade statutes, the issue seems destined to be resolved by the courts.

***

Attorneys in Pierson Ferdinand LLP’s International Practice and other PierFerd sector experts stand ready to counsel clients how to mitigate the impact of tariffs and monitor ongoing developments to help companies stay compliant. We practice before the U.S. Trade Representative (Executive Office of the President), Department of Commerce, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. International Trade Commission, other federal regulatory agencies and the US Congress. We also litigate trade claims in the US courts involving claims against federal agencies as well as disputes between commercial parties. For additional information, please contact the following PierFerd International Practice attorneys or your regular PierFerd contact for assistance:

Philip Gallas, Founding Partner philip.gallas@pierferd.com

Ari Levine, Founding Partner and Co-Chair of International Practice ari.levine@pierferd.com

PierFerd’s attorneys have a breadth of experience and expertise to navigate the many facets of doing business internationally.  The firm offers clients a multidisciplinary approach in this and other matters. For example, the International Practice group has experience in Customs & Trade tariffs and trade remedy proceedings (IEEPA, Section 232 National Security, China Section 301, Section 201 Global Safeguards, Antidumping & Countervailing Duty proceedings). The Renewables & Alternative Energy practice group has experience in the solar, wind, EV and battery storage industries and is available to advise on ways to reduce the impacts of the increased tariffs through corporate restructuring and tax strategies that are specific to these industries. Our International Transactional Practice includes extensive experience with dozens of countries across the world including Latin America, the European Union, the United Kingdom, the Middle East, and China and Japan. If there are transactions to be paused, unwound, or restructured, the International Transactional Practice is well-placed to advise. Finally, our International Disputes Team can handle international litigation and arbitration needs.


This publication and/or any linked publications herein do not constitute legal, accounting, or other professional advice or opinions on specific facts or matters and, accordingly, the author(s) and PierFerd assume no liability whatsoever in connection with its use. Pursuant to applicable rules of professional conduct, this publication may constitute Attorney Advertising. © 2025 Pierson Ferdinand LLP.

Previous
Previous

Department of Justice Issues Updated FCPA Guidelines

Next
Next

House Passes “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” with Significant Cuts to IRA Renewable Energy Tax Credits