A Democrat-led coalition of 22 attorneys general and two governors on Thursday sued in the Court of International Trade, pushing back against the Trump administration’s newly imposed 10 percent global tariffs and launching the first legal challenge to the president’s use of Section 122 to temporarily reinstate duties struck down by a Supreme Court decision last month.
The top cops of states such as Arizona, California, Oregon, Maryland, New York and Vermont say that the White House is stretching the law past its limits. Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act allows the president to impose tariffs of up to 15 percent for 150 days only under narrow circumstances, such as when the United States faces “large and serious” deficits with the nation’s balance of payments, or when the flow of goods, services and investments with the rest of the world goes awry. Trade deficits, they argue, aren’t the same thing, making the president’s move not only unprecedented but also unlawful.
Related Stories
“American consumers and business owners have made it clear they do not want tariffs, yet President Trump has tried over and over again to implement them. This time, the president is attempting to use an obscure law as a tool for his tariffs, and is yet again going about it illegally,” California’s attorney general, Rob Bonta, said in a statement. “Why is President Trump, who ran on the promise of making life more affordable for families, breaking the law to raise the cost of living for Americans?”
President Trump issued his Feb. 20 executive order imposing a 10 percent across-the-board tariff on imports immediately after the Supreme Court invalidated a broad and uneven rollout of customs levies under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. It was apparently just a warning shot, with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent saying Wednesday the figure will increase to 15 percent—the maximum allowed under Section 122—“likely sometime this week.”
“The courts rejected President Trump’s earlier attempt to impose tariffs—and yet the president keeps finding new, unlawful ways to raise prices on groceries and household items Marylanders depend on every day,” Maryland’s attorney general, Anthony Brown, said in a statement. “Our office will not stand by while Marylanders’ budgets are stretched thin because this administration believes it is above the law.”
The lawsuit also claims Section 122 tariffs violate the Constitution’s separation of powers, since Article 1 gives Congress—not the president—the power to tax and impose tariffs. It seeks court orders declaring the tariffs illegal, blocking their implementation and requiring refunds for any costs already paid by states.
California, New York and other states similarly moved to block the IEEPA tariffs in 2025, contending they require explicit congressional approval. The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit shut down the Trump administration’s bid to delay payments estimated at more than $100 billion. The Court of International Trade, too, has ordered those refunds. Another potential kicker: Department of Justice court filings defending the same tariffs called trade deficits “conceptually distinct from balance-of-payments deficits.”
“Once again, President Trump is ignoring the law and the Constitution to effectively raise taxes on consumers and small businesses,” New York’s attorney general, Letitia James, said in a statement. “After the Supreme Court rejected his first attempt to impose sweeping tariffs, the president is causing more economic chaos and expecting Americans to foot the bill. These tariffs will only drive up the cost of living, and I will continue to uphold the rule of law to protect New Yorkers.”
Speaking to Sourcing Journal at the American Apparel & Footwear Association Executive Summit in Washington, D.C., after the news hit, Steve Lamar, the trade organization’s executive director and CEO, said that history “keeps repeating itself,” meaning executive tariffs that tax U.S. consumers and businesses, followed by “lengthy litigation.”
”We’ll keep repeating ourselves too—calling for clear, consistent, congressionally approved trade policy based on rule of law,” he said. “We urge the administration and Congress to work together to create policy that supports innovation and long-term investment for the industry that directly employs 3.6 million American workers and that helps America get dressed every day.”
