U.S. court strikes Trump’s 10% tariffs

Tariffs are back in court again — and Trump just lost another round. On May 7, the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled that his fallback 10% global tariff was unlawful, saying he stretched a narrow 1970s trade law past what Congress allowed. But the weird part is that the tariff did not vanish for everyone. The court’s order was narrow, so the duties are blocked only for the two companies that sued and for Washington state while the appeal fight starts. (politico.com) ### What tariff did the court strike down? This was Trump’s Plan B. Earlier this year, the Supreme Court knocked out his broader worldwide tariffs, so the administration switched to Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 and imposed a temporary 10% tariff across the board. That tariff took effect on February 24 and was pitched as a stopgap tool while the White House looked for other ways to keep pressure on trading partners. (politico.com) ### Why did the judges say no? Basically, Section 122 is a small emergency lever, not a blank check. It lets a president respond to balance-of-payments problems for a limited time, but the court’s majority said Trump used it for a much broader trade-policy project. In plain English — the law was written for a specific kind of short-term(politico.com)reading dispute, but the majority still concluded the administration had gone beyond the statute. (politico.com) ### Why are the tariffs still partly alive? Because the remedy was narrow. The court did not issue a nationwide block. It protected the parties in the case — two private importers and the state of Washington — and left the tariff in place for everyone else while the administration appeals. So the headline is “court strikes tariffs,” but the practical reality is messier. Many importers still face the duty today unless they were part of that suit. (usnews.com) ### Why does this matter beyond those plaintiffs? Because it hits the legal theory behind Trump’s backup tariff system. If the administration loses on appeal too, one of its main replacement tools is gone. That matters for companies that price inventory months ahead, and for allies trying to figure out whether White House tariff threats are durable policy or just leverage that may get thrown out later. (politico.com) ### What is Trump doing with Europe? At almost the same moment, Trump raised the pressure on the EU. He said after a call with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen that Europe has until July 4, 2026, to carry out commitments from last year’s Scotland trade accord or face “much higher” tariffs on EU goods, including cars. S(politico.com)ons. (bloomberg.com) ### Where does Canada fit into this? That’s another sign of how unstable the whole posture is. Trade talks are continuing with Mexico, but Canada has been pushed out of the current USMCA discussions even though the review deadline is getting close. That leaves North American trade policy looking less like a single strategy and more like a stack of separate pressure campaigns. (notus.org) ### So what happens next? The administration is likely to appeal, and it may keep searching for other statutes to rebuild tariff pressure if this route fails. But every loss narrows the map. The more courts say no, the harder it gets to sell these duties as settled policy instead of provisional bargaining chips. (politico.com)urt did not end Trump’s tariff push. It did something more damaging in the long run — it said the president cannot just grab any old trade law and turn it into a universal tariff machine. (politico.com)