A coalition of 25 Democratic-led states filed a lawsuit on Monday against the Trump administration, challenging its latest round of global tariffs imposed on 60 trading partners, including the European Union and Canada. The legal challenge, filed in the U.S. Court of International Trade in New York, alleges that the administration exceeded its legal authority by enacting the tariffs under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974.
The lawsuit argues that the new tariffs—ranging from 10% to 12.5%—are a pretextual attempt to reinstate broader import taxes that were struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in February. The tariffs took effect last month, replacing temporary duties that expired at the same time. Critics contend the timing confirms the administration’s intent to circumvent the high court’s ruling.
California and New York lead the legal challenge, joined by states including Oregon, Illinois, Massachusetts, and Washington. The coalition asserts that the administration bypassed required country-specific investigations and used the tariffs as a tax on American families and businesses rather than a targeted response to forced labor concerns.
Administration Defends Tariffs as Legal and Necessary
The White House defended the tariffs in a statement to CBS News, asserting that the administration is acting within its lawful authority under Section 301. A spokesman stated that the tariffs target countries failing to enforce prohibitions on goods produced with forced labor, which the administration argues burdens U.S. commerce and workers.
The U.S. Trade Representative’s office announced the tariffs last month, citing alleged failures by trading partners to address forced labor in supply chains. The administration has previously defended similar tariffs as part of its "America First" economic agenda, aimed at correcting unfair trade practices.
Economists, however, have noted that tariffs often result in higher costs for U.S. consumers, contributing to persistent inflation. Critics argue that the broad application of the tariffs—covering 99.4% of U.S. imports—goes beyond addressing forced labor and functions as a de facto tax increase.
Legal Precedent and Broader Context
The lawsuit marks the third major legal challenge to Trump’s tariff policies in recent months. Previous tariffs were struck down by the Supreme Court in February, prompting the administration to restructure its approach under a different legal authority. Legal experts note that the new lawsuit hinges on whether the administration’s use of Section 301 complies with statutory limits, particularly after prior rulings found similar tariffs unlawfully broad.
Small businesses have also filed separate lawsuits challenging the tariffs, arguing that they disproportionately harm domestic enterprises already struggling with economic pressures. The administration has countered that the measures are necessary to protect American workers from unfair competition.
Additional Legal Actions Target Data Sharing Policies
In a separate but related development, California and over 20 states filed another lawsuit on Monday to block a Trump administration rule allowing the sharing of personal data from social service recipients with immigration officials. The rule, part of an effort to combat fraud in the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program, would permit the disclosure of recipients’ immigration status, Social Security numbers, and other sensitive information.
Critics, including New York Attorney General Letitia James, argue that the policy targets vulnerable populations rather than addressing fraud. The administration has defended the measure as a commonsense tool to reduce waste and identify individuals in the country illegally who may be accessing benefits.
The White House has not yet responded to requests for comment on either lawsuit.