Court of International Trade strikes down Trump's 10% tariffs
- A three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled Trump’s 10% global import tariff unlawful on May 7, striking down his backup plan. - The court said Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 did not authorize an open-ended across-the-board tariff; the duties took effect February 24. - It’s Trump’s second tariff defeat in months, but he is still threatening the EU with higher duties by July 4.
Tariffs are back in court again — and Trump just lost again. On May 7, the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled that his 10% tariff on most imports was unlawful, knocking out the backup plan his team built after the Supreme Court killed the first round earlier this year. That matters because this wasn’t some side policy. It was the administration’s broad fallback tool for taxing goods coming into the U.S. from almost everywhere. (politico.com) ### What exactly did the court strike down? The court struck down Trump’s across-the-board 10% tariff on imports, the version that took effect on February 24 after his earlier “Liberation Day” tariffs were blocked. The judges said the administration had leaned on Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 in a w(politico.com)wer. The panel was divided, 2-1. (politico.com) ### Why was this the backup plan? Because Trump had already lost the bigger version. Earlier in 2026, the Supreme Court let stand a ruling that blocked his first wave of sweeping tariffs, many of which had been imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. So the White House tried a different statute — older, narrower, and supposedly safer in court. Turns out that route was shaky too. (cbsnews.com) ### What was wrong with Section 122? Section 122 is not a blank check. It gives a president some room to respond to balance-of-payments problems, but the trade court said that does not mean the White House can slap an indefinite 10% duty on nearly everything coming into the country. That’s the core legal problem here — the administration treated a limited tool like a universal one. (msn.com) ### Does the ruling end the tariff fight? Not really. The decision was narrower than some importers wanted. NPR’s account said the ruling applied to the importers who sued and to Washington state, which means there was early uncertainty about whether every importer would immediately stop paying. (msn.com) almost certainly will keep looking for other ways to pressure trading partners. (vpm.org) ### So why is Trump still threatening Europe? Because the legal loss did not change the politics. On the same day, Trump said he would give the European Union until July 4 to carry out trade deal commitments or face “much higher” tariffs on EU goods, including cars. He said he set that deadline after a call (vpm.org)ign kept going. (usnews.com) ### What does this mean for companies? For importers, this is a real opening. A blanket 10% tariff hits everything from industrial inputs to consumer goods, so knocking it out reduces cost pressure — at least for now. But businesses still do not have clean certainty. Appeals are likely, other tariff authorities still exist, and Trump is still using tariff threats as leverage in negotiations with big partners like the EU. (apnews.com) ### Why does this keep happening? Because trade law gives presidents real power, but not unlimited power. Courts are now drawing a line between targeted authority and sweeping unilateral tariffs that look more like Congress’s job. That is the deeper story here. Trump is testing the outer edge of executive trade power, and courts are saying that edge is closer than he wants. (abcnews.com) ### Bottom line? This ruling does not end Trump’s tariff push. But it does make one thing much harder — imposing a broad global import tax by simply reaching for another statute after losing in court once already. (politico.com)
