President Donald Trump’s sweeping tariffs on Mexico, Canada, and China may be illegal under the Constitution. But blocking the tariffs in court is likely to be difficult — and time-consuming.
Understanding IEEPA and Its Powers
Trump announced Saturday he was levying 25 percent tariffs on goods from Mexico and Canada and a 10 percent tariff on goods from China, under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, a little-known law passed nearly 50 years ago. It’s the first time a president has ever used the law to impose tariffs, although the measure has repeatedly been used by past administrations to enact sanctions.
The International Emergency Economic Powers Act, passed in 1977, grants the president broad authority over economic transactions, and a wide range of abilities to deal with “any unusual and extraordinary threat,” stemming in whole or in part from foreign sources.
Legal Battles and Executive Power
Trump’s novel use of the law, however, is likely to spark legal battles that will test the limits of a president’s executive power.
Presidents, including Trump’s predecessor Joe Biden, have used the law to impose economic sanctions on other countries, including on Russia after it launched its 2022 war on Ukraine.
But the closest a president has come to citing a national emergency to impose tariffs was when President Richard Nixon used a different law — the Trading with the Enemy Act of 1917 — to levy a temporary universal tariff on all imports in 1971.
Legal Challenges and Predictions
Trump justified his new tariffs Saturday by pointing to “the major threat of illegal aliens and deadly drugs killing our Citizens, including fentanyl,” which he claims Mexico, Canada, and China are not doing enough to keep from coming into the United States.
But Bill Reinsch, a former Commerce Department official now at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said Trump’s use of IEEPA to justify his trade actions “doesn’t really pass the red-face test,” setting the stage for a company or trade association whose members have been harmed by the action to sue.
“The question will be, can you find a judge who will write an injunction to stay the tariffs from going into effect,” Reinsch said. “And my prediction is that will be hard, because you’re asking a federal judge to essentially say, ‘I know more than the President does about what an emergency is.’ And I think judges are going to be reluctant to do that.”
Industry Reactions and Potential Lawsuits
Major business groups like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and American Farm Bureau Federation are already sounding alarms about Trump’s decision to impose tariffs and are calling on the three countries to reach a deal.
“The President is right to focus on major problems like our broken border and the scourge of fentanyl, but the imposition of tariffs under IEEPA is unprecedented, won’t solve these problems, and will only raise prices for American families and upend supply chains,” Chamber Senior Vice President and Head of International, John Murphy said in a statement.
Any lawsuit isn’t likely to be filed until after the tariffs go into effect on Tuesday. And there’s a good chance the Trump administration will be able to negotiate a reduction in the tariffs with Mexico, Canada, and China well before any suits wind their way through the courts.
Potential Resolutions and Future Implications
What about the WTO? China has already threatened to file a complaint with the World Trade Organization and take unspecified “corresponding countermeasures to firmly safeguard its own rights and interests.”
But the U.S. effectively killed the WTO Appellate Body during Trump’s first term by blocking the appointment of new judges, leaving it without the ability to adjudicate disputes.
The more likely avenue to resolve the dispute could be during next year’s mandatory review of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement, the North American trade deal Trump inked in his first term.
What about Congress? Trump could also face pressure from Congress to rein in his tariffs, although Republicans who now control both chambers have been careful not to harshly criticize his trade strategy, even those from major farm exporting states that could bear the brunt of any retaliation.
Doug Palmer contributed to this report.