U.S. trade court rules Trump's 10% global tariff unlawful

Tariffs are back in court again — and this time Trump lost on his backup plan, not his original one. A three-judge panel at the U.S. Court of International Trade said the administration could not use Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 to slap a 10% tariff on most imports. That matters because this was the White House’s replacement tool after the Supreme Court already knocked out a broader round of tariffs earlier in 2026. But the catch is that the court did not shut the policy down for everyone. ### What did the court actually do? The court ruled 2-1 on May 7 that Trump’s February proclamation imposing the 10% global tariff was unlawful as applied to the plaintiffs in the case. The majority said the tariffs imposed on those plaintiffs were “unauthorized by law.” The panel was split, with Judges Mark Barnett and Claire Kelly in the majority and Judge Timothy Stanceu dissenting. (politico.com) ### Why was Section 122 the fight? Section 122 is a narrow emergency trade power. It lets a president impose temporary import surcharges of up to 15% for no more than 150 days when the U.S. faces serious balance-of-payments problems. Trump used it as a Plan B after a separate tariff progra(politico.com)er the first one slammed shut. (politico.com) ### Who won relief? Not everyone who sued. The court blocked the tariffs for Washington state and the two private-company plaintiffs — spice importer Burlap & Barrel and toy company Basic Fun! The broader coalition of 24 mostly Democratic-led states did not get nationwide relief because the court said those states lacked standing to demand that kind of injunction. (politico.com) ### So do the tariffs stop now? For most importers, no. That is the strange part of the ruling. Even though the court said the legal theory was flawed, the 10% duty stays in place for nearly everyone else while the appeals process plays out. So this is a real legal blow, but not an immediate across-the-board rollback at the border. (politico.com) ### Why is the ruling narrow? Because courts separate “this policy is bad” from “who gets a remedy.” The judges said the private plaintiffs showed specific harm, but they would not extend that relief universally. Think of it like a cracked foundation that only some tenants are allowed to m(politico.com)way. (usnews.com) ### What happens next? An appeal is widely expected, likely to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Meanwhile, these temporary tariffs are expected to expire in July anyway. The administration also is not out of options — Trump has signaled he wants to keep rebuilding br(usnews.com)ue in July. (usnews.com) ### Why does this matter beyond these plaintiffs? Because it keeps narrowing the president’s legal room to run a global tariff program without Congress. Trump’s first tariff architecture already fell at the Supreme Court. Now the trade court has punched a hole in the replacement archi(usnews.com)efund fights over billions in duties. (usnews.com) ### Bottom line This was not a sweeping shutdown of Trump’s 10% tariff. It was something more awkward for the White House — a court saying the legal theory failed, while leaving the policy alive for most importers for now. That keeps the cash flowing at the border in the short run, but it makes the long-run strategy look a lot shakier.