U.S. court scraps 10% Trump tariffs

Tariffs are back in court again — and Trump lost again. This time the fight was over the 10% blanket tariff he put on most imports in February 2026 after the Supreme Court killed his earlier, broader tariff program. On May 7, the U.S. Court of International Trade said that replacement tariff was illegal too. So the administration’s fast, across-the-board tariff option just got a lot narrower. (politico.com)ally strike down? The court struck down Trump’s 10% global tariff on most imports — the fallback tariff his team imposed under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. A divided three-judge panel ruled 2-1 that Section 122 does not let a president impose this kind of broad, effectively indefinite tariff wall. That matters because this was the administration’s Plan B after its first tariff theory collapsed. (politico.com) ### Why was there a Plan B? Because the Supreme Court had already taken away Plan A. On February 20, 2026, the Court held in *Learning Resources v. Trump* and *Trump v. V.O.S. Selections* that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act — IEEPA — does not authorize the president to impose tariffs at all. That decision wiped out the legal basis for Trump’s earlier “Liberation Day” tariff push and forced the White House to hunt for another statute. (congress.gov) ### So what is Section 122? Basically, it is an older trade-law provision meant for balance-of-payments problems, not a permanent universal import tax. Trump used it in February as a workaround because it looked faster than launching product-by-product trade cases. But the trade court said the administration was reading that law far too broadly. The judges’ point was simple — a narrow emergency valve is not the same thing as a standing license to tax nearly everything coming into the country. (politico.com) ### Why does this matter beyond one tariff? Because it changes the president’s leverage. A blanket tariff is the trade-policy version of a light switch — one move, immediate pressure, huge coverage. Section 301 cases and other traditional trade tools work more like permits and inspections. They can still produce tariffs, but they take investigations, findings, comment periods, and more legal exposure. That means less room for sudden escalation in any near-term trade standoff. (mcall.com) ### What happens to money importers already paid? Now the messy part starts. Customs and Border Protection has already set up an IEEPA duty refund process through the ACE Portal, where importers and brokers can file CAPE declarations and arrange ACH refunds. Reporting this week says the first refund payments are beginning around May 12. But not every business has clean records, and smaller importers may struggle to recover everything quickly. Winning in court is one thing — getting cash back is another. (cbp.gov) ### Does this automatically kill every Trump tariff? No — and that is the catch. The ruling hits this specific 10% global tariff built on Section 122, just as the Supreme Court earlier hit tariffs built on IEEPA. Other tariff authorities still exist, including Section 301 and sector-specific statutes. So this is not the end of Trump’s tariff agenda. It is the end of using these two shortcut legal theories for sweeping blanket duties. (politico.com)28)) ### What should readers take from this? The real story is not just that one tariff got tossed. It is that courts are forcing the White House back into slower, narrower trade law. That weakens the threat of instant universal tariffs, but it does not mean trade fights are over. It means they are more likely to arrive through longer investigations, more paperwork, and more court battles. (politico.com)