A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) ruled Wednesday that President Trump exceeded his statutory authority in imposing sweeping tariffs on global imports under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). Tariffs imposed under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 remain valid.
In a Thursday ruling, a Federal appeals court granted a stay "until further notice." Tariffs can be collected during the stay.,
Seperately on Wednesday a district court judge found the tariffs unlawful, but allowed 14 days for an appeal. That order still stands.
In the Wednesday [Ruling] the CIT had granted summary judgment in favor of plaintiffs, including 12 states and five businesses, and permanently enjoined the enforcement of both the “Worldwide and Retaliatory Tariffs” and “Trafficking Tariffs” issued earlier this year through multiple executive orders.
The court concluded that IEEPA does not confer the President with unlimited authority to impose tariffs, holding that such a broad delegation would violate constitutional principles under the nondelegation and major questions doctrines. The judges emphasized that IEEPA permits trade restrictions only to “deal with an unusual and extraordinary threat,” and found that the tariffs imposed failed to satisfy that standard.
Regarding the trafficking-related tariffs on Canada, Mexico, and China, the court held that they were not sufficiently connected to the specific threats they purported to address—namely, failures by those governments to curtail drug trafficking. The decision rejected the administration’s claim that tariffs were a permissible tool of diplomatic “leverage” under IEEPA.
The ruling vacated Executive Orders 14193, 14194, 14195, 14228, 14257, and 14266, among others, and prohibits further enforcement. While the President cannot be sued directly, relief was granted against U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, and the Department of Commerce.
The President reacted to the CIT decision on social media. Referring to the judicial panel, he posted “Backroom ‘hustlers’ must not be allowed to destroy our Nation!”
“Where do these initial three Judges come from? How is it possible for them to have potentially done such damage to the United States of America? Is it purely a hatred of ‘TRUMP?’ What other reason could it be?”
(Judge Timothy Reif was appointed by President Trump in 2018. Judge Gary Katzmann was appointed by President Obama in 2016 and Senior Judge Jane Restani was appointed by President Reagan in 1983. Ed.)
“In this case, it is only because of my successful use of Tariffs that many Trillions of Dollars have already begun pouring into the U.S.A. from other Countries, money that, without these Tariffs, we would not be able to get,”
“It is the difference between having a rich, prosperous, and successful United States of America, and quite the opposite,” the President continued. "“Radical Left Judges, together with some very bad people, are destroying America.”
Regardless of the ultimate disposition in court, the White House is intent on using tariffs as a tool for negotiation and raising revenue. If the IEEPA gambit fails, expect efforts on other fronts.
In a LinkedIn post National Security professional & host of The Security Economics podcast Peter Harrell identifies some next steps for the White House:
"What will Trump do, beyond appeal? A couple of options:
"(Legally strongest option): Use Section 301 to set a foundation for tariffs on major trading partners based on their unfair trade and economic practices. 301 could create a solid legal foundation for substantial tariffs on many trading partners, but would require a much more disciplined tariff process and *might* create some upper bounds on rates. Trump might try to use Section 122 to maintain 10-15% tariffs for a few months while USTR works on 301 investigations.
"Dust off Section 338, a 1930-era provision that is sort of like 301, but which has fewer procedural requirements, and hasn't been used since the 1940s. If I were a government lawyer, I'd be worried about using 338 broadly given I just lost an IEEPA tariff case. But the Trump Administration has a higher litigation risk tolerance than I do.
"Rely even more on Section 232 to cover a *lot* of different products. Trump is already closing in on directing 50% of all 232 investigations (since 1962), but could go quite a bit further."
Reuters quoted White House Trade Advisor Peter Navarro, saying that if IEEPA fails, they'd use 232 or 301 actions, as well as Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930 and Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974.
"So you can assume that even if we lose, we will do it another way," Navarro said.
As of May 29, 2025, the following tariffs are in effect under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962: 
Steel and Aluminum Tariffs
• A 25% tariff is imposed on all steel and aluminum imports, including derivative products.
• This tariff applies to imports from all countries; previous exemptions for nations such as Canada, Mexico, the European Union, and others were revoked on March 12, 2025.
• The tariffs also extend to derivative products, including certain aluminum cans and canned beer, effective April 4, 2025.  
Automotive Tariffs
• A 25% tariff is applied to imported automobiles and automobile parts.
• These tariffs took effect on April 3, 2025, for automobiles and on May 3, 2025, for auto parts.
• Exemptions are provided for vehicles and parts that comply with the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA).  
Ongoing Investigations
The Department of Commerce has initiated Section 232 investigations into the national security implications of importing the following products:
• Copper
• Semiconductors
• Pharmaceuticals
• Timber and lumber
• Processed critical minerals
• Medium- and heavy-duty trucks and parts
• Commercial aircraft and jet engines     
These investigations may lead to the imposition of additional tariffs, pending their outcomes.
Comments
No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here