Legal and political battle

New slap to Trump on trade: global tariffs of 10 per cent rejected

A federal court annulled the February measures; the Supreme Court had already invalidated the reciprocal tariffs. The president: we will appeal against 'extreme left-wing judges'

by Luca Veronese

8 May 2026

Importazioni. Una nave cargo nel porto di Oakland in California REUTERS

4' min read

Translated by AI

Versione italiana

Key points

The trade judges' decision
House Bank explores other avenues but appeals arrive
Trump's battle over tariffs

4' min read

Translated by AI

Versione italiana

The universal and temporary tariffs of 10% imposed by Donald Trump in February were also considered 'illegitimate' and were therefore rejected by the Court of International Trade. The Republican administration's economic agenda thus suffered a new, serious blow, after the Supreme Court had struck down reciprocal import tariffs based on an alleged national emergency, also in February. And while the US president is preparing for his mid-month mission to China to also discuss tariffs and trade with Xi Jinping.

The Republican administration has announced that it will appeal. 'Nothing surprises me anymore with the courts,' Trump commented, attributing the decision to 'two far-left judges who voted against it'.

The trade judges' decision

A three-judge panel of the Court of International Trade in New York, the federal court that has jurisdiction in foreign trade matters, ruled that the president did not have the authority to trigger new generalised tariffs on the basis of Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974: this law allows tariffs on imports for up to 150 days (and for a maximum of 15%, although Trump had so far limited himself to 10%), in response to serious and persistent imbalances in the balance of payments. The Court of Commerce - with two votes in favour and one against - rejected this justification and thus decided that the tariffs decree, signed by Trump in February, was also 'invalid' and that the 'tariffs imposed are not authorised by law'.

The Court of Commerce granted the request of a group of small businesses and 24 US states, most of which are Democratic-led. But the court immediately blocked the administration's application of tariffs only against the two companies - toy manufacturer Basic Fun! and spice importer Burlap & Barrel - that filed the lawsuit, and the state of Washington, making it clear that it had not issued a 'universal injunction'. The panel held that the other states had no standing to sue because they are not direct importers.

In Trump's intentions, the tariffs just rejected by the Court of Commerce - linked to balance of payments imbalances - were supposed to replace the so-called reciprocal tariffs, introduced in 2025 under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977: the latter measures were annulled by the Supreme Court, which did not see the conditions of national emergency and therefore the need for the White House to resort to special powers.

House Bank studies other ways but appeals arrive

"It will perhaps need further consideration on appeal and then in the Supreme Court," explained Dave Townsend of the law firm Dorsey & Whitney, adding that "other importers will probably now ask to be refunded", estimated at over EUR 10 billion. While refunds totalling USD 166 billion to importing companies were initiated for the cancelled tariffs back in February.

While the new political defeat is undoubted, from a practical point of view, the consequences of the ruling may not be very significant: the tariffs were due to expire in July and the administration intends to replace them with actions based on a different regulation, Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, which is considered more robust: it provides for tariffs in response to unfair and discriminatory trade practices, but requires months of investigation to arrive at sanctions against partner countries in situations such as overcapacity or exploitation of workers.

Sectoral sanctions, such as those on metals and cars, also remain in place. The White House has also reached trade agreements that often include higher tariffs, such as 15% in the case of the European Union. And Trump's threats to use tariffs as tools to punish governments that do not comply with his orders continue: on European cars the tariffs - the US president said - could rise to 25% from July.

Trump's battle over tariffs

As soon as he returns to the White House in early 2025, Trump will hit imports from China, Mexico and Canada with harsh measures. Then he will sign more conciliatory agreements and reach a truce with Beijing.

On 2 April 2025, Trump proclaims the day of liberation from countries that exploit the United States. And he introduces so-called reciprocal tariffs - from 10 to 50 per cent - against 'unfair' trading partners.

Trump continues to threaten countries around the world with tariffs. He imposes deals and moves tariffs on imports of various sectors: from pharmaceuticals to metals, cars, and even tech manufacturing.

In February 2026, the Supreme Court justices affirmed that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977, invoked by Trump, does not apply: there is no national emergency, no special powers are needed. Tariffs are invalid.

Trump reacts with new temporary tariffs of 10%. These, too, are rejected: for the Court of Commerce, the balance of payments imbalances required by Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 are not present.

Trump announces appeal and studies new tariffs. Industry sanctions remain in place. And against the EU the threat of 25% tariffs on cars