Democratic-led states sue to block tariffs

Twenty-five Democratic-led states filed a new lawsuit on August 3 seeking to stop the Trump administration’s latest tariffs, extending a trade fight that has already produced a Supreme Court loss for the White House and a separate setback in the U.S. Court of International Trade. The new complaint was filed in the trade court in New York and challenges tariffs that took effect last month on goods from dozens of trading partners. The states argue the administration is trying to revive a broader tariff program that courts have already found unlawful. The White House has continued to defend its tariff strategy while shifting to new legal authorities after earlier defeats. ### Which states sued, and where did they file? A coalition of 25 states brought the case in the U.S. Court of International Trade, according to reports on the filing. The states include California, New York, Illinois and other Democratic-led states; Time reported the full list also includes Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Kentucky, Hawaii, Massachusetts, Michigan, Maryland, Maine, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, North Carolina, New Mexico, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin. (politico.com) The August 3 complaint follows an earlier March lawsuit by 24 Democratic-led states over Trump’s first replacement tariffs. In that earlier case, New York Attorney General Letitia James, joined by California, Oregon and Arizona, asked the same court to declare a new global 10% tariff illegal and block its implementation. ### What tariffs are they trying to stop this time? (insurancejournal.com) The latest lawsuit challenges tariffs of 10% or 12.5% on imports from 60 trading partners, CNBC reported. Politico reported on July 23 that the administration had finalized new double-digit tariffs on dozens of countries as it sought to rebuild a tariff regime struck down by the Supreme Court in February. (politico.com) Politico also reported on July 31 that the latest wave was tied to allegations that other countries were not doing enough to combat forced labor. The states argue that rationale is unlawful or pretextual, according to AP’s account of the suit summarized by the Mercury News. ### Why are the states calling this an end run around the courts? (cnbc.com) The Supreme Court ruled on February 20 that Trump exceeded his authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act when he imposed sweeping tariffs on virtually every country, according to Politico and Newsweek. After that ruling, Trump turned to Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 for a temporary 10% global tariff, which the administration described as a bridge to other trade actions. (politico.com) On May 7, a divided three-judge panel of the Court of International Trade ruled that Trump had also unlawfully used Section 122 for that backup tariff plan. Judges Mark Barnett and Claire Kelly wrote that the February proclamation was invalid as applied to the plaintiffs before them, while the injunction was limited to Washington state and two companies that had standing. (politico.com) The new lawsuit says the administration is again trying to replace tariffs that have already been struck down. AP’s summary of the suit described the states as calling the newest duties a pretext for replacing import taxes the Supreme Court rejected in February. ### What legal theory is the administration using now? The administration has repeatedly shifted statutory grounds after each court loss. (politico.com) In March, Trump’s replacement tariffs relied on Section 122, a law that allows a president to impose a surcharge of as much as 15% for up to 150 days to address a “large and serious” balance-of-payments deficit, Politico reported. (mercurynews.com) By late July, the administration had moved to a new tariff package tied to forced-labor findings involving other countries, according to Politico. The latest state lawsuit is one of several new legal challenges to that newer round of duties. ### What happens next in court? The U.S. Court of International Trade will hear the states’ challenge alongside a growing set of tariff cases brought by states and businesses. (politico.com) Earlier rulings in that court did not produce nationwide relief for all importers, but they did create precedents that other plaintiffs have cited. (politico.com) The next concrete step is action by the Court of International Trade on the August 3 complaint and any request for an injunction. Separate tariff disputes have already moved through the Federal Circuit on appeal, and the administration has continued defending its tariff program in those cases. (politico.com 1) (politico.com 2)