A fresh wave of legal challenges has emerged against President Donald Trump’s newest tariff measures, as small businesses file lawsuits arguing the administration overstepped its authority. The cases, filed in the US Court of International Trade, target import duties imposed on goods from dozens of trading partners.
Two separate lawsuits have been filed since the tariffs took effect. Educational toy company Learning Resources, which previously challenged Trump’s tariff policy, brought one action. The second was filed by New York spice importer Burlap & Barrel and California watch retailer Collective Horology, represented by the Liberty Justice Center.
The plaintiffs contend that the administration failed to justify the tariffs on a per-country basis and did not adequately explain how the duties would address forced labor concerns, a requirement under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974. They argue the new tariffs effectively replace the worldwide duties the Supreme Court invalidated earlier this year, and that changing the legal basis does not resolve the court’s concerns about presidential authority.
The Trump administration defends the measures, stating they target nations that have not prevented imports linked to forced labor. The tariffs apply to imports from 60 trading partners and cover nearly all US imports.
Trade lawyers note that these challenges may face a tougher path than previous cases. Unlike earlier tariffs, the latest duties rely on Section 301, a trade law that has historically survived court scrutiny and was widely used during Trump’s first term. Legal experts predict the tariffs could remain in place for an extended period while the cases proceed, with relief requiring countries to prove effective enforcement of US demands.
The lawsuits add to ongoing legal and political battles over Trump’s trade agenda, with businesses warning that prolonged uncertainty could disrupt imports, costs, and investment decisions.