Two lawsuits filed by small businesses are challenging the sweeping tariffs announced by the Trump administration last Thursday, which impose double-digit levies on 60 trading partners. The tariffs, implemented under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, target countries the administration claims have failed to prevent imports produced by forced labour.
Educational toy company Learning Resources, which previously won a Supreme Court case against earlier tariffs, filed a new suit on Friday in the Court of International Trade alongside several other small businesses. A second lawsuit was brought by Burlap and Barrel, a New York-based spice company, and Collective Horology, a watch retailer from Ventura, California, represented by the Liberty Justice Center, a libertarian advocacy group.
Both suits argue that the government failed to adequately establish its case against each specific economy or explain how the tariffs would eliminate the specified practice, as required by Section 301. 'Forced labour is morally indefensible, but an important objective does not give the government permission to ignore the law,' said Sara Albrecht, chairman and CEO of the Liberty Justice Center.
Critics note that the tariffs cover 99% of U.S. imports and replace the worldwide tariffs imposed last year that were struck down by the Supreme Court in February. Temporary 10% worldwide tariffs, also challenged in court, expired on the same day. The White House did not respond to a request for comment.
Experts warn that challenging the current round may be harder than previous attempts. Section 301 was used to impose tariffs on China during Trump’s first term, surviving court challenges. Lawyer Patrick Childress of Holland & Knight, a former U.S. trade official, said: 'Unlike the Section 122 levies that expired Friday, these tariffs will be with us for the long haul.' Even if countries adopt the policies the U.S. demands, they must prove enforcement to Washington’s satisfaction before tariffs are removed.
