Court Declares Trump’s 10% Global Tariffs Unlawful

May 7, 2026 Court of International Trade ruled 2-1 that President Donald Trump’s 10 percent global tariff under Section 122 of the Trade Act was “invalid and unauthorized.” Judges Mark Barnett and Claire Kelly barred collection from Washington state and from plaintiffs Burlap & Barrel and Basic Fun!, leaving the tariff pending appeal.

Politico

Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act permits temporary import surcharges up to 15 percent for 150 days when the U.S. faces “fundamental international payments problems.” The Supreme Court struck down Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs, which used the IEEPA, prompting the February Section 122 “Plan B” tariff.

The Hill

Washington state, Democratic-led states, spice importer Burlap & Barrel and toy maker Basic Fun! sued. Liberty Justice Center’s Jeffrey Schwab represented the businesses. The administration’s defense came from U.S. Trade Representative. Judges Mark Barnett and Claire Kelly wrote the majority; Judge Timothy Stanceu dissented. Judge Richard Eaton oversees refunds.

Politico

The 10 percent tariff was projected to raise about $8 billion in Section 122 revenue in March, while prior IEEPA tariffs had collected roughly $166 billion. Plaintiffs said the duties caused “major financial and operational uncertainty” for supply-chain-dependent firms.

LA Times

The White House announced it will appeal. The U.S. Trade Representative noted ongoing Section 301 investigations into dozens of partners. Liberty Justice Center emphasized Section 122 was not intended for “large and serious balance-of-payments deficits.” The two companies called the ruling a “major victory” for small businesses.

Politico

The We Pay the Tariffs coalition argued the administration misread Section 122, conflating trade deficits with balance-of-payments deficits, and praised the decision as “more positive news.” President Trump denounced the judges as “ashamed” and lamented “hate to pay people back” for refunds.

Trade court says Trump's 10% global tariffs are unlawful

The injunction applies only to Washington state and two plaintiffs, leaving the tariff active for other importers and raising uncertainty about broader refund eligibility. Section 301 investigations could trigger new tariffs before the current duties expire in late July.

CNN

• “This ruling is a major victory for small businesses like ours,” — Ethan Frisch and Ori Zohar, co-founders and co-CEOs, Burlap & Barrel

Politico

• “The Court should have gone further and blocked collection of these tariffs during any appeal,” — Dan Anthony, executive director, We Pay the Tariffs coalition

Politico

• “Congress authorized the President to impose tariffs where the United States experienced fundamental international payments problems and needed to respond to large and serious balance-of-payments deficits,” — Jeffrey Schwab, senior counsel, Liberty Justice Center

Politico

• “I’m ashamed of certain members of the court – absolutely ashamed – for not having the courage to do what’s right for our country,” — Donald Trump, President of the United States

USA Today

The administration intends to appeal to the Federal Circuit, with a Supreme Court petition thereafter. Judge Richard Eaton is supervising an automated refund system for IEEPA duties, and the Treasury will issue interest-bearing refunds to affected importers.

LA Times