A 2-1 Court of International Trade panel struck down Trump's Section 122 global tariffs as unlawful, the second major tariff rebuke of 2026. An appeal is already filed.
A split three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled 2-1 on May 8 that President Trump's 10% across-the-board global tariffs, imposed under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, are "invalid and unauthorized by law" [1]. The administration had turned to Section 122 as a fallback authority after the Supreme Court struck down the tariffs Trump had previously imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act [1]. The panel's majority found that the president's invocation of Section 122 exceeded the statutory authority Congress granted under that provision [1].
The case reached the court through suits filed by three plaintiffs: the state of Washington, specialty spice importer Burlap & Barrel, and toy manufacturer Basic Fun! [1]. The Liberty Justice Center represented the private-party plaintiffs before the three-judge panel sitting in New York [1]. The U.S. Department of Justice defended the administration's position that Section 122 supplied adequate legal authority for the sweeping tariff order [1]. The ruling applies directly to those named plaintiffs, though its reasoning bears on the broader tariff regime [1].
The decision marks the second major judicial repudiation of Trump's unilateral tariff authority in 2026 and extends a constitutional confrontation over the scope of executive power in trade policy [1]. Section 122 authorizes temporary import restrictions in response to balance-of-payments deficits, subject to specific statutory conditions and a 150-day cap [1]. The majority's conclusion that the administration's use of the statute was unauthorized suggests the court read those conditions narrowly, foreclosing the White House's bid to find an alternative statutory vessel after the IEEPA avenue closed [1]. The lone dissent indicates the legal question is genuinely contested, which will factor into any appellate calculus on a stay [1].
The Trump administration moved immediately to appeal the ruling and simultaneously sought a stay of the panel's order pending that appeal [1]. The Federal Circuit, which has exclusive jurisdiction over Court of International Trade appeals, will hear the case next [1]. Given the national economic stakes and the split among lower-court judges, the litigation is a strong candidate to return to the Supreme Court, which would then confront the full scope of presidential tariff authority under the post-IEEPA statutory landscape [1].