Tariff fight moves to courts
The dispute over President Trump’s latest tariffs has shifted from headline policy moves into legal and administrative channels, leaving businesses unsure which products will be hit next. Courts and new legal efforts are challenging replacement measures even after a Supreme Court ruling, while importers and domestic producers are lobbying to shape possible duties. That uncertainty is prompting firms across industries to reconsider sourcing and supply‑chain plans as the policy battle plays out. (talkingpointsmemo.com) (eu.usatoday.com) (moneycontrol.com)
President Donald Trump’s latest tariffs are no longer being fought mainly at the White House. They are now being contested in courtrooms, agency dockets and lobbying campaigns over which imports could face new duties next. (apnews.com) The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 on February 20, 2026, in *Learning Resources v. Trump* that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not let a president impose broad tariffs. Trump answered the same day by invoking Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 for a new global import surcharge. (law.cornell.edu) (crsreports.congress.gov) Section 122 is narrower than the emergency law the court rejected. The statute caps a temporary import surcharge at 15% and 150 days, and Trump’s current Section 122 tariffs are scheduled to expire on July 24, 2026. (uscode.house.gov) (talkingpointsmemo.com) That did not end the dispute. A coalition led by Oregon and 23 other states sued on March 5, and a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of International Trade heard arguments on April 10 over whether a broad trade deficit qualifies as the kind of “fundamental international payments problem” Section 122 requires. (doj.state.or.us) (reuters.com) The legal fight now overlaps with a second battle inside the trade bureaucracy. The Trump administration has said it can use the 150-day Section 122 window to run investigations under other laws, especially Section 232 for national security cases and Section 301 for unfair trade practices. (crsreports.congress.gov) Those investigations create a new set of deadlines for companies that import or compete with imports. The Office of the United States Trade Representative opened Section 301 investigations on March 11 and March 12, 2026, including cases on structural excess capacity and forced-labor enforcement, with written comments and hearing requests due April 15. (ustr.gov) (dwt.com) Businesses are using that process to argue over product-by-product outcomes. USA Today reported that Learning Resources, which helped win the Supreme Court case, is opposing new duties, while other importers and domestic producers are pressing officials to spare or target goods such as cheese, infant sleeping bags and ceramics. (usatoday.com) The administration also still has older trade tools available that were not erased by the February ruling. Analysts at the Council on Foreign Relations said the decision was narrow and left in place tariffs imposed under other statutes, including earlier Section 232 and Section 301 actions. (cfr.org) That leaves companies planning around policy that could change by court order, by agency finding or by presidential proclamation. The next big marker is July 24, when the current Section 122 tariffs expire unless Congress extends them or the administration replaces them with duties built on a different legal foundation. (talkingpointsmemo.com)
