U.S. trade court: Presidential tariffs overturned for exceeding legal authority under IEEPA
Tariffs imposed by the president under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) were not legally authorized.
The U.S. Court of International Trade on May 28, 2025, issued a decision holding that tariffs imposed by the president under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) were not legally authorized. The case involved two groups of plaintiffs: businesses challenging the “Worldwide and Retaliatory Tariffs,” (i.e., the Reciprocal Tariffs) and States challenging both those tariffs and the “Trafficking Tariffs” (i.e., the fentanyl/migration tariffs on China, Canada, and Mexico).
The case is: V.O.S. Selections, Inc. v. United States, Slip Op. 25-66 (United States Court of International Trade). Read the court’s opinion (49 pages)
Summary
The court's decision was based on the interpretation of IEEPA, which the court held does not grant the president unlimited authority to impose tariffs. Such a broad delegation of power would violate constitutional principles, specifically the nondelegation doctrine, which requires Congress to provide clear guidelines when delegating its powers, and the major questions doctrine, which demands clear congressional authorization for decisions of significant economic and political impact.
The Worldwide and Retaliatory Tariffs were found to be beyond the president's authority because they lacked “any identifiable limits” and thus fall outside the scope of authority granted under IEEPA to “regulate…importation.” Although these tariffs were intended to address trade imbalances, the court noted that the exercise of IEEPA to impose these tariffs did not adhere to the specific conditions set by Congress for such actions.
Additionally, the Trafficking Tariffs were ruled unauthorized because they did not directly address the specific threats they claimed to target, as required by IEEPA. The court emphasized that the tariffs should have a direct connection to the problem they aim to solve, rather than serving as a pressure tactic to influence other countries' actions.
The Trump Administration has since appealed the decision. Tariffs imposed under separate legislative authority, including the Section 232 steel/aluminum and automobile/auto parts tariffs and Section 301 tariffs, remain in force.