Two small US businesses have filed a lawsuit challenging President Trump’s recent tariffs imposed on goods from 60 countries, claiming the tariffs exceed presidential authority.
The new tariffs, applied under Section 301 of the Trade Act, follow previous rounds ruled illegal by courts, highlighting ongoing legal disputes over the administration’s trade policies.
Two United States small businesses have challenged US President Donald Trump’s latest round of tariffs on goods from 60 trading partners, saying that the new policy, like most of Trump’s previous tariffs, went beyond the president’s authority to tax imports.
Related coverage: Can Netflix adapt to changing viewer habits amid declining binge-watch audiences?.
The lawsuit, filed on Friday in the US trade court in New York, argues that the new tariffs require more detailed country-specific findings about “forced labor” to be legally justified.
The two small businesses, backed by a nonprofit legal group that successfully sued over previous rounds of tariffs, argued that the president is trying to re-impose tariffs that were already ruled illegal by the US Supreme Court.
More context: Overview of Trump’s latest tariffs imposed on more than 80 countries.
The Trump administration on Friday imposed new tariffs of 10 percent and 12.5 percent on 60 trading partners, including the European Union, over allegations that they were not doing enough to stop the export of goods produced with forced labour. The new tariffs took effect just as a temporary 10 perccent global tariff expired.
Trump has made tariffs a central pillar of his foreign policy, using them as leverage to negotiate trade deals around the globe. But the US Supreme Court ruled against most of Trump’s widest-ranging tariffs on February 20, finding that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) does not authorise the president to unilaterally impose tariffs on trading partners.
Also read: Alphabet achieves 12th consecutive quarter of significant revenue gains.
Trump responded to that ruling by criticising the court and imposing a new and temporary 10 percent global tariff under different legal authority. Those tariffs, like IEEPA tariffs, were also imposed under a section of the law that no previous president had used to impose tariffs, and they were also ruled illegal by the US trade court. The Trump administration is appealing that ruling.
Friday’s tariffs were imposed under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, which is meant to combat unfair or discriminatory economic practices by other nations.
Background: Tesla’s profits decline as company focuses on robotics, AI, and autonomous driving.
Unlike IEEPA or the temporary global tariff authority, Section 301 has been used regularly by past presidents.
But the states and small businesses said in their lawsuit that Section 301 tariffs have historically been targeted to address specific nations and industries, and Trump’s broad-brush approach has no historical precedent.
Related coverage:
No comments yet. Start the discussion.