White House appeals court decision that struck down Trump's 10% global tariffs

Tariffs are back in court again — and this time the fight is over Trump’s backup plan, not his original one. After the Supreme Court knocked out his broader tariff program in February, the White House switched to a temporary 10% tariff on most imports under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. On May 7, the U.S. Court of International Trade said that move was unlawful. On May 8, the Justice Department appealed, so the legal fight is now headed toward the Federal Circuit. ### What exactly got appealed? The administration appealed a 2-1 ruling from the Court of International Trade in New York. That ruling said Trump had used the wrong legal authority for the 10% global tariff he announced in February after losing the earlier Supreme Court case. The appeal does not create a new tariff. It just tries to save the one already in place. (abcnews.com) ### Why did the trade court say no? The whole case turns on one dry but crucial phrase — “balance-of-payments deficits.” Section 122 lets a president impose temporary import surcharges of up to 15% for up to 150 days when the U.S. faces serious international payments problems. The court’s majority said that is not the same thing as a normal trade deficit, and that the administration tried to stretch the statute past what Congress actually wrote. (abcnews.com) ### Why does Section 122 matter so much? Because it was Trump’s Plan B. His earlier sweeping tariffs had already been struck down, so Section 122 became the narrower route for keeping a broad global duty in place. But Section 122 is also a short-term tool by design — temporary, capped, and tied to a specific kind of economic problem. Basically, it is not a blank check for a standing worldwide tariff. (abcnews.com) ### Did the court kill the tariffs for everyone? Not yet. This is the weird part. The court granted relief only to the plaintiffs it said had standing — Washington state, Burlap & Barrel, and Basic Fun! It dismissed the claims from the larger group of states. So for most importers, the tariffs can keep being collected while the appeal moves forward. (politico.com) ### Why only those plaintiffs? Standing. Courts do not just ask whether a policy looks illegal. They ask who is allowed to challenge it. The panel said the two companies and Washington state had shown the kind of direct injury needed for an injunction. That makes the ruling important as a legal precedent, but narrower in immediate effect than the headline suggests. (politico.com) ### What happens next? The appeal goes to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington. That court handles appeals from the trade court. But there is a timing problem — these tariffs are set to expire in late July under the statute itself, so the case may run into the clock before judges fully resolve the merits. ### Why are businesses still uneasy? (politico.com) Because “illegal” does not automatically mean “gone.” Importers still face a system where the tariff may apply to them today, may disappear later, and may or may not produce refunds down the line. For companies planning orders months ahead, that kind of legal limbo is almost as disruptive as the tariff itself. (abcnews.com) ### What’s the real bottom line? This is now a fight over how far presidential tariff power can stretch after the courts already rejected one broad theory. The White House is trying to preserve leverage. The courts are signaling that even backup tariff tools have real limits. And because the tariff itself expires in late July, the administration may win time on appeal without ever winning a clean legal blessing. (abcnews.com) (politico.com)