USTR vows to appeal court ruling that blocked Trump's 10% tariffs

Tariffs are back in court again — and this time the fight is over Trump’s fallback plan, not the bigger tariff program that already got knocked out. On May 8, U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said the administration expects to win its appeal after the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled that Trump’s temporary 10% global tariff was unlawful. The immediate stakes are practical. Importers want to know whether they still owe the money, whether refunds are coming, and whether the White House still has a usable all-purpose tariff tool. ### What changed this week? A three-judge panel on the Court of International Trade ruled on May 7 that Trump’s 10% across-the-board tariff under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 was not authorized by law. Then, a day later, Greer said the administration would appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and that it expects to prevail. ### What tariff are we talking about? This is the 10% temporary import surcharge Trump imposed on February 20, 2026, after the Supreme Court struck down his earlier worldwide tariffs that had been justified under emergency powers. The replacement measure took effect on February 24 and applied to imports from nearly every country, with some exceptions. Basically, this was Plan B. (aol.com) ### What is Section 122, exactly? Section 122 is an old part of the 1974 trade law that lets a president impose a temporary import surcharge of up to 15% for no more than 150 days, unless Congress extends it. The statute is aimed at serious balance-of-payments problems — not just any trade complaint. That limit matters because the administration tried to use it as a fast substitute for much broader tariffs it had already lost. (whitehouse.gov) ### Why did the court reject it? The short version is that the judges did not buy the legal theory that persistent U.S. deficits let the president slap a 10% tariff on almost everything. The panel split 2-1, and the majority said the proclamation went beyond what Congress allowed under Section 122. So even though the law does permit temporary surcharges in some circumstances, the court said this one did not fit. (uscode.house.gov) ### Did the court shut the tariff off for everyone? Not yet. The catch is the ruling’s relief was narrow. The court blocked collection for Washington state and two private importers that were part of the case, rather than issuing a blanket nationwide injunction. That means the tariff can remain in place for many other importers while the appeal plays out — unless other courts or later orders broaden the effect. (politico.com) ### Why is Greer sounding so confident? Because the administration does not just want to save this tariff bill. It wants to preserve tariffs as leverage in trade negotiations and as a policy tool it can deploy quickly. If Section 122 survives on appeal, the White House keeps a narrower but still powerful mechanism. If it loses again, another major route for fast unilateral tariffs gets weaker. (france24.com) ### Why does the July date matter? Section 122 only allows a surcharge for 150 days unless Congress extends it. The current measure is expected to expire in July 2026 anyway. So the legal fight is partly about the money being collected right now, but also about precedent — whether presidents can reuse this statute in the future as an emergency tariff workaround. (aol.com) ### What’s the bottom line? The administration is appealing because this case is bigger than one 10% tariff. It is really a fight over whether Trump still has a quick legal path to broad import taxes after the Supreme Court closed the first one. For businesses, that means more uncertainty. For the White House, it means the tariff strategy is still alive — but hanging on appellate judges. (aol.com) (uscode.house.gov)