Federal Courts Issue Conflicting Rulings on Presidential Tariff Authority
A recent federal court decision has cast uncertainty over several Trump-era tariffs. On May 28, the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled that President Trump lacked the legal authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose certain tariffs. However, less than 24 hours later, a federal appeals court temporarily reinstated the tariffs while it considers a longer-term stay of the lower court’s ruling.
What Tariffs Are Affected?
The initial ruling would have removed:
-
- 10% global tariffs
- Reciprocal tariffs on over 60 countries (paused until July 9)
- Tariffs on Chinese goods (paused until August 12)
- Retaliatory tariffs related to the fentanyl crisis targeting Canada, Mexico, and China
However, this decision does not impact tariffs imposed under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act — such as the 25% tariffs on steel, aluminum, and auto parts — nor does it prevent the administration from imposing new, sector-specific tariffs (e.g., on pharmaceuticals, critical minerals, or smart phones).
What’s Next?
The lower court gave the administration 10 days to lift the tariffs. In response, the Department of Justice filed an emergency motion with the U.S. Court of Appeals and warned it may appeal to the Supreme Court if needed. For now, the appeals court has paused the lower court ruling and given plaintiffs until June 5 to respond. Meanwhile, the administration could use alternative legal avenues, such as Section 122 of the Trade Act, to reinstate tariffs under specific economic conditions, or Section 338 of the Tariff Act to respond to discriminatory trade practices.
Legal Landscape Still Evolving
Separately, a judge in D.C. ruled in favor of two plaintiffs challenging the tariffs but delayed enforcement for 14 days to allow for appeal. With multiple ongoing legal challenges, further developments, including conflicting rulings, are expected in the coming weeks.
