What To Know After Legal Hearing Considers Whether To Block Tariffs

Topline The U.S. Court of International Trade heard arguments Tuesday over whether to block President Donald Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs as litigation against the levies moves forward, though judges gave little indication of their views on the president’s sweeping policy, questioning both sides about their legal claims. President Donald Trump boards Air Force One on May 12 at Joint Base Andrews, Maryland. Key Facts The U.S. Court of International Trade is considering a request by a coalition of small businesses to broadly halt Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs on foreign imports—the firms are seeking an injunction that would pause tariffs while their broader lawsuit against them plays out. Plaintiffs argue Trump’s tariffs are unlawful because while the president said he implemented the tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), that law—which allows presidents to impose some economic sanctions during national emergencies—does not permit imposing tariffs, and there is no national emergency to justify using the law even if it did. The Trump administration opposes blocking the tariffs, arguing the plaintiffs haven’t properly shown they’d face significant harm if Trump’s tariffs aren’t paused, and claiming the IEEPA’s “text, purpose and history” authorize Trump to impose his tariffs. A three-judge panel questioned both sides about their arguments, with judges asking plaintiffs about their reasoning for why the U.S.’ trade imbalances with other countries doesn’t constitute a “national emergency” like the Trump administration claims, and why, if the IEEPA doesn’t allow presidents to impose tariffs, the law doesn’t expressly say that. Judges also questioned the Trump administration about its claims, repeatedly noting tariffs and delegating who imposes them is “the business of Congress”—versus the Trump administration giving the president broad authority to impose tariffs—and questioning the notion that Trump has virtually unchecked authority to impose tariffs under the IEEPA. Judge Jane Restani also chastised the government for talking about the “great deals” it had made on trade because of the tariffs, saying, “We don’t deal with policy. We deal with law,” and telling the defendants, “Don’t argue policy to the court—that’s not our business.” Will Trump’s Tariffs Get Blocked In Court? It’s still unclear how the court will rule on blocking Trump’s tariffs, with judges noting during Tuesday’s hearing that their “vigorous questioning” of both sides “should not be interpreted as expressing any views” about the case. Attorney Jeffrey Schwab, who argued in court on behalf of the small businesses, told reporters Tuesday that while he didn’t want to speculate about the outcome, he was “very happy with the way [the hearing] went,” noting the judges appeared “very engaged” with their arguments. Tangent While it didn’t get brought up during Tuesday’s hearing, attorney Robert Shapiro, who chairs Thompson Coburn LLP’s International Trade and Transportation Regulatory Practice Group, told Forbes prior to the hearing that the Trump administration’s announcement early Monday that it’s temporarily rolling back its tariffs on Chinese imports could also affect judges’ thinking. The 90-day pause could make it harder for the plaintiffs to prove the tariffs should be immediately blocked, Shapiro said, as the 30% total tariff rate in place during the rollback is far less than the sky-high 145% tariffs businesses previously faced. That “in some ways creates a challenge to the plaintiffs in the case,” Shapiro said. While the plaintiff companies claim the tariffs will make it harder for them to do business and compete, Shapiro also noted that with all businesses facing the same fees, “maybe all prices go up and then you’re back in a competitive environment.” What To Watch For It’s unclear how quickly the panel of judges will rule on whether to block the tariffs, and they gave no indication during the hearing about when their decision could come out. Tuesday’s hearing is only the first step in what’s likely to be a lengthy legal process over Trump’s tariffs, both in this case and in similar lawsuits, which were brought by other small businesses and the state of California. Shapiro said the Court of International Trade can act “pretty quickly,” though while he expects the issue of whether to immediately block the tariffs to be decided faster, it’s unlikely there will be any ruling on the issue of whether Trump violated the IEEPA before the 90-day pauses on his tariffs on China and other countries expire. The plaintiffs have asked the court to rule on an expedited basis to permanently block the tariffs, but it’s unclear whether the judges will. Even if the court were to rule quicker on whether or not Trump acted unlawfully in imposing the tariffs, the losing party—whether that’s the Trump administration or the businesses—will almost certainly appeal the decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and then likely to the Supreme Court after that. Legal experts told Bloomberg the federal circuit court is historically deferential to presidents when it comes to imposing tariffs, though it’s still unclear how the Supreme Court could ultimately rule on the issue. “I think the Supreme Court may find it to be a stretch,” Shapiro said about Trump using the IEEPA to justify his tariffs, “but this court is hard to predict.” Surprising Fact The legal push against Trump’s tariffs has been driven by conservative-leaning legal groups, which are broadly opposed to sweeping uses of presidential authority in crafting regulations and policy. The lawsuit being heard Tuesday was brought by the Liberty Justice Center and a separate lawsuit is being backed by the New Civil Liberties Alliance, which are both nonpartisan groups that have historically taken conservative positions. The Pacific Legal Foundation, a major right-leaning legal group founded by Reagan administration officials, filed a brief with the Court of International Trade on behalf of small businesses that decries Trump’s “arbitrary and ever-changing tariff policy,” arguing the president is exercising “unilateral and arbitrary power” that violates the Constitution. Key Background Tuesday’s hearing came after the Court of International Trade—which decides international trade disputes—ruled in April not to immediately halt the tariffs while it decided whether to impose a longer injunction, saying only that the plaintiffs “have not clearly shown a likelihood” they will suffer “irreparable and immediate harm” if the tariffs aren’t paused immediately. Trump has made tariffs a centerpiece of his policy agenda despite warnings from economists that doing so would raise prices for consumers and roil the economy. The president imposed tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China after taking office, before rolling his tariffs out to nearly all countries—even uninhabited ones—in early April. After the tariffs sparked chaos in the global markets, causing stocks to plunge, Trump imposed a 90-day pause on the worst of his tariffs, keeping a 10% baseline rate in place while freezing the higher rates levied on many countries’ goods. The president escalated his tariffs on China, however—raising the combined tariff rate to at least 145%—before his administration announced a 90-day pause on those fees Monday amid negotiations with Beijing. Trump’s tariffs and the continued uncertainty over them have been particularly harmful to small businesses like those behind the litigation heard Tuesday, who are less capable of absorbing the high fees on products manufactured overseas. Further Reading Forbes US And China Agree To Roll Back Most Tariffs For 90 Days As Negotiations Continue By Siladitya Ray Forbes Trade Court Keeps Trump’s Tariffs In Place—At Least For Now By Alison Durkee Forbes Can Trump’s Tariffs Be Undone In Court? First Lawsuit Targets ‘Liberation Day’ Orders As Conservative Lawyers Protest Policy By Alison Durkee Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2025/05/13/key-trump-tariff-hearing-court-weighs-potential-block-but-doesnt-hint-how-it-will-rule/