Twenty-five Democratic-led US states filed suit on 3 August 2026 to block tariffs imposed on 60 trading partners, arguing the president lacked legal authority for the sweeping 10% and 12.5% levies.
A coalition of 25 Democratic-led US states has challenged the Trump administration in court, alleging that the President’s latest tariffs on imports from 60 trading partners, like many of his previous sweeping tariff measures, exceed the legal authority granted to the executive branch to impose import taxes.
The 25 Democratic-led states are Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin
The states sued in the US Court of International Trade in New York, claiming Trump’s broad tariff approach on goods from 60 partners—including the EU—exceeds presidential powers under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974. The administration imposed the tariffs on 24 July, citing forced labour as the justification.
The new levies affect over 99% of US imports.
This is Trump’s third major tariff regime to face court challenges in 2026. The US Supreme Court ruled against his widest tariffs on 20 February, finding that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) did not authorise unilateral tariff authority.
After defeat, Trump issued separate 10% global tariffs under a different legal theory—one also struck down by the Court of International Trade, though those tariffs remained in effect pending appeal.
Section 301 as legal cover
Unlike IEEPA, Section 301 has precedent: past presidents have used it. But the states and small business plaintiffs argue that historical Section 301 action targeted specific nations or industries, not sweeping global tariffs. They contend Trump’s use lacks precedent and represents a straightforward attempt to resurrect tariffs already ruled illegal by substituting “forced labour” concerns as a pretext.
Track record of losses
States and small businesses have already won legal challenges to Trump’s previous tariff regimes, yet the administration continues issuing new tariffs despite the rulings.
Trump has made tariffs central to his second-term foreign policy strategy, even after his February Supreme Court loss—calling justices “disloyal” in response.
