25 States Sue Over New Tariffs: What You Need to Know

The Big Picture

Twenty-five states have teamed up to sue the federal government over new taxes on imported goods. These taxes (called tariffs) affect products coming from 59 countries and the European Union. The states say these new tariffs are just a workaround after the Supreme Court already said "no" to similar tariffs earlier this year.

What Are Tariffs? (ELI5 Explanation)

Think of tariffs like a toll booth at a bridge.

When a truck carrying goods from another country wants to enter the U.S., it has to pay a fee. That fee is a tariff. The company importing the goods pays it, but usually they pass that cost on to you — the customer — through higher prices.

The Timeline: How We Got Here

1. First Attempt: Emergency Powers (IEEPA)

What happened: President Trump used a 1977 law called the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to put high tariffs on almost every country.
His argument: America’s trade deficit (buying more from other countries than we sell to them) was a "national emergency."
Result: The Supreme Court said NO in February 2025. The Court ruled IEEPA doesn’t give the president power to set tariffs.
Consequence: The government had to refund money to companies that already paid those tariffs.

2. Second Attempt: Temporary 10% Tariffs

What happened: After losing at the Supreme Court, the administration imposed a temporary 10% tariff on everything worldwide.
Result: These expired at midnight on July 24, 2025.

3. Third Attempt: Section 301 Tariffs (Current Lawsuit)

What happened: Now the administration is using Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974.
The claim: 59 countries + EU aren’t doing enough to stop forced labor (people forced to work against their will) in making goods.
The tariffs: 10% to 12.5% on goods from countries that supply 99% of U.S. imports.
Result: 25 states + small businesses are suing.

Who’s Suing?

The States (25 Total)

Led by New York Attorney General Letitia James, these states joined the lawsuit:

Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Maryland, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Virginia, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin
(Plus New York)

Small Businesses

Two separate lawsuits filed in July 2025 in the Court of International Trade
They argue the government didn’t follow the proper steps required by Section 301

What Is Section 301? (And Why It Matters)

Section 301 Cheat Sheet

Law: Trade Act of 1974

Purpose: Lets the president punish countries with "unfair trade practices"

Process required: Investigation → Consultation → Public record → Decision

Track record: Used by presidents for decades. Trump used it on China in his first term — those tariffs survived court challenges.

The Core Arguments

The States’ Side

"After losing at the Supreme Court, the administration is once again trying to illegally raise taxes on families and businesses with a new round of tariffs."
— NY AG Letitia James

Key claims:

This is a pretext (fake reason) to replace the illegal tariffs
The "forced labor" justification is copy-pasted for 59 countries — not specific to each one
Section 301 requires case-by-case proof — not a blanket list

The Administration’s Side

"The United States is using its lawful authority… A foreign country’s failure to enforce a prohibition on forced labor… burdens U.S. commerce and must be addressed. Section 301 tariffs have proven to be a legally durable tool."
— White House spokesman Kush Desai

Key claims:

Forced labor is real and hurts American workers
Section 301 is the right legal tool — Congress built it with "guardrails"
This isn’t about emergency powers — it’s about unfair trade practices

What Legal Experts Say

Barry Appleton (Law Professor, NY Law School Center for International Law):

Point	What It Means
Section 301 has history	Unlike IEEPA, this law has been used for tariffs before — and survived courts
Real guardrails exist	Congress required investigation, public input, and a paper trail
But "copy-paste" is risky	Applying nearly identical findings to 59 countries may not meet the "specific proof" standard
The real fight	Not "can he do this?" but "did he follow the rules Congress set?"

Why This Matters to You

Your Wallet

Tariffs = higher prices on imported goods (electronics, clothes, furniture, car parts, etc.)
99% of imports affected = almost everything not made in the USA

American Jobs

Administration says: Tariffs will bring factories back to the U.S.
Critics say: Tariffs raise costs for U.S. manufacturers who need imported parts

Rule of Law

Can the president keep trying new laws until one sticks?
Do agencies have to actually investigate each country before punishing them?

What Happens Next?

Court hears arguments — Both sides present evidence
Judge decides — Is the Section 301 process valid? Were rules followed?
Possible appeal — Loser likely appeals to higher court
Tariffs stay or go — While case proceeds, tariffs may remain in effect

Summary

25 states + small businesses are suing over new 10–12.5% tariffs on 59 countries + EU
This is the third attempt at broad tariffs after two failures (Supreme Court rejection + expired temporary tariffs)
The administration now uses Section 301 — a law with more legal precedent but strict procedural rules
Core dispute: Did the government do the required homework for each country, or just copy-paste a template?
Outcome affects: Prices you pay, legality of executive trade power, and U.S. trade policy direction

FAQ

What’s the difference between IEEPA and Section 301?

IEEPA is for national emergencies (like freezing assets of terrorists). The Supreme Court said it doesn’t cover tariffs. Section 301 is specifically for unfair trade practices — it’s the "right tool for the job," but it comes with strict homework requirements.

Why do the states say this is a "pretext"?

Because the administration tried two other legal justifications first, both failed, and then switched to forced labor under Section 301. The states argue the real goal is revenue/replacing lost tariffs, not actually stopping forced labor.

**Do these tariffs apply to all goods from those countries?**

The article says they "hit countries that provide 99% of American imports" at rates of 10–12.5%. Specific product exemptions (if any) aren’t detailed in this report.

Can the president just impose tariffs whenever he wants?

No. The Constitution gives Congress power over taxes and trade. The president only has authority Congress delegates through specific laws — and each law has rules he must follow.

How long will this lawsuit take?

Trade cases in the Court of International Trade can take months to years. Emergency rulings (preliminary injunctions) can happen faster, but final decisions take time — and appeals add more.

Bottom Line: This isn’t just about taxes on imports — it’s about whether the executive branch can keep shopping for legal theories until one works, or whether it must follow the step-by-step process Congress wrote into law.

Popular Posts