A US trade court has struck down President Donald Trump’s latest 10 percent global tariffs, ruling that the across-the-board duties were not justified under a decades-old trade law.
The US Court of International Trade ruled 2-1 in favour of a group of small businesses that challenged the tariffs, which took effect on February 24. The businesses argued that the measures were an attempt to bypass a US Supreme Court ruling earlier this year that invalidated a broader set of Trump-era tariffs imposed under emergency powers.
In its decision on Thursday, the court said Trump’s use of Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 was inappropriate for addressing the trade deficits cited in his February order. The law permits the president to impose temporary duties of up to 150 days to address serious balance-of-payments deficits or prevent an imminent depreciation of the US dollar.
However, the court found that the administration had failed to demonstrate the kind of economic emergency envisioned under the statute.
One judge dissented, arguing it was premature to grant victory to the plaintiffs.
The ruling marks another legal setback for Trump’s trade agenda after the US Supreme Court ruled in February that a broad range of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) were illegal. Following that decision, Trump introduced a new round of global tariffs using Section 122 authority under the 1974 trade law, a legal approach that had not previously been tested in court.
Reacting to Thursday’s ruling, Trump signalled that his administration would continue pursuing alternative methods to impose tariffs.
“Nothing surprises me with the courts,” Trump told reporters. “Nothing surprises me, so we always do it a different way. We get one ruling, and we do it a different way.”
The administration is widely expected to appeal the latest ruling, setting the stage for another legal battle over presidential authority on trade policy and tariffs.
The decision could have significant implications for global exporters to the United States, many of whom have faced uncertainty over shifting US tariff measures in recent months. Exporters from major manufacturing economies in Asia, Europe and Latin America had been preparing for the impact of the blanket 10 percent duties, which affected a broad range of goods entering the US market.
Trade analysts say the ruling may temporarily ease pressure on exporters and supply chains if the tariffs are suspended or delayed during the appeals process. However, continued legal disputes and the possibility of new tariff mechanisms from the Trump administration are likely to keep uncertainty elevated for businesses dependent on access to the US market.
The case is also being closely watched for its broader constitutional and economic implications, particularly regarding the limits of presidential power to impose sweeping trade restrictions without congressional approval.