Trump's 10% global tariffs blocked

Tariffs are back in court again — and this time the fight is over Trump’s fallback plan. After the Supreme Court knocked out his broader tariffs in February, the White House switched to a temporary 10% tariff on most imports using Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act. On May 7, the U.S. Court of International Trade said that move was illegal. On May 8, the administration appealed. ### What did the court actually do? A three-judge panel at the Court of International Trade ruled 2-1 that Trump could not use Section 122 to impose this across-the-board tariff. The court said that law was written for serious balance-of-payments problems — basically a specific kind of international payments crisis — not for the ordinary trade deficit Trump pointed to when he announced the tariff in February. (usnews.com) ### Why was Trump using Section 122? Because his first legal route had already collapsed. In February 2026, the Supreme Court ruled that Trump lacked authority to impose his earlier sweeping tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. So the administration rebuilt part of the same policy using a different statute — Section 122 — which allows temporary import restrictions for up to 150 days in narrow circumstances. (usnews.com) ### So are the 10% tariffs gone now? Not for everyone. That is the catch. The trade court blocked the tariffs only for the parties that sued — the state of Washington and two importers, Burlap & Barrel and Basic Fun! The court did not issue nationwide relief, which means the tariff still applies to most importers while the appeal plays out. That is why businesses are still stuck in limbo instead of getting a clean answer. (usnews.com) ### Why is Section 122 such a weak tool? Because Congress wrote it as a short-term emergency valve, not as a general tariff weapon. The statute lets a president impose temporary restrictions for up to 150 days, and any longer extension needs Congress. That made it useful as a stopgap after the Supreme Court loss, but also vulnerable in court. If your legal theory depends on stretching “payments problems” to mean “we import more than we export,” judges may not buy it. (usnews.com) Here, two of them didn’t. ### What happens next on appeal? The administration has already appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Jamieson Greer said the government expects to win. But that is a harder promise to hear confidently after the Supreme Court already rejected the earlier tariff theory this year. The broader pattern now is repeated judicial skepticism toward using old statutes to build new global tariffs without Congress. (usnews.com) ### Does this end Trump’s tariff agenda? No. It narrows one path. The administration is still pursuing broader tariffs through other laws, especially Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, and Reuters noted three Section 301 investigations are due for completion in July. So the legal setback is real, but it does not mean the White House is out of tools. It means the White House is being pushed toward tools with clearer statutory footing. (usnews.com) ### Why do importers still feel stuck? Because the legal win is partial and temporary. Companies now have to decide whether to keep paying, sue for their own relief, or wait for the appeal. They also have to think about refunds, customs treatment, and the possibility that one tariff program dies only to be replaced by another. For supply chains, that is almost worse than a stable bad rule — uncertainty makes planning harder than pain you can at least price in. (usnews.com) ### Bottom line? Trump’s 10% global tariff just took another big legal hit. But the tariff fight is not over — it has shifted from “can he do this?” to “which law, for how long, and for whom?” (usnews.com)