Donald Trump’s latest attempt to reshape U.S. trade policy is once again under legal pressure. After the Supreme Court struck down his sweeping “Liberty Day” tariffs, the president moved quickly to introduce a new set of duties—only to find them now facing fresh challenges in court.
Last month, Trump imposed a blanket 10% tariff using Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. This marked a strategic pivot, as his earlier tariffs had relied on emergency powers that the Supreme Court ruled he could not use to justify such broad measures. Section 122, a relatively obscure provision, allows temporary tariffs to address balance-of-payments issues, but its use in this context has raised significant legal questions.
Two lawsuits have now been filed at the Court of International Trade, with hearings scheduled for next month. At the heart of at least one case is the argument that Trump has once again overstepped his authority. Lawyers contend that Section 122 does not grant the sweeping tariff powers the administration claims, accusing the move of undermining constitutional limits and destabilizing global markets.
The administration, however, is preparing a defense of its legal interpretation. Even if the courts ultimately uphold the tariffs, the reliance on less commonly used statutory tools could complicate Trump’s broader trade agenda. Legal uncertainty may slow down implementation and reduce the administration’s flexibility to act quickly in future trade disputes.
Meanwhile, the fallout from the earlier, invalidated tariffs continues to unfold. In a separate case, the Court of International Trade ordered US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to issue refunds to a company that had challenged tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). Although the ruling technically applies only to that plaintiff, the judge made clear that all affected importers should benefit.
CBP has acknowledged the scale of the issue, noting that approximately 330,000 importers and 53 million entries were subject to the IEEPA tariffs. The agency stated that it is not currently equipped to process the refunds but could do so within 45 days if it upgrades its systems.
Taken together, these developments underscore the complex legal landscape surrounding Trump’s trade policies. As courts continue to weigh in, the administration’s efforts to impose tariffs are increasingly shaped not just by economic strategy, but by the limits of executive power under US law.
