Twenty-five Democratic-controlled states filed a federal lawsuit Monday challenging President Trump's latest round of tariffs, arguing the levies are just as unlawful as the ones the Supreme Court already struck down. The suit, co-led by Oregon, Arizona, and California, targets tariffs imposed under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, which the administration has used to justify duties of 10% to 12.5% on imports from 60 trading partners.
The new tariffs, announced last month, are the third attempt by the White House to unilaterally impose sweeping import taxes since Trump returned to office. Previous efforts were invalidated by courts, including a 6-3 Supreme Court ruling that blocked use of an emergency statute. The administration now cites Section 301, which allows tariffs in response to unfair trade practices, pointing to a months-long investigation into forced labor overseas.
In the complaint, the states argue that the administration is using forced labor as a pretext to continue an illegal tariff scheme. “The Plaintiff States oppose forced labor in all its forms and support protections for workers around the globe,” the lawsuit states. “But the Administration cannot use forced labor as a pretext to continue its illegal tariff scheme.”
The states contend that U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer has failed to follow the procedural requirements of Section 301, including mandated timelines and consultation processes. They are asking the court to set aside the tariffs and order refunds of any duties already collected.
“The tariffs the USTR imposed are so broad that they defy the USTR's own stated aims and make a mockery of the statute used to justify them,” the states wrote in their filing.
The legal action adds to a wave of challenges from small businesses and trade groups that have also filed suit against the new tariffs in recent days. The Hill has reached out to the USTR for comment, but no response has yet been received.
This lawsuit marks the third time Democratic-led states have gone to court over Trump's tariff policies. The first round, based on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, was rejected by the Supreme Court. A second attempt, under a temporary authority, was ruled unlawful by a lower court and has since expired. The new case sets the stage for a third round of litigation that could again reach the high court.
Legal experts say the outcome could hinge on whether the administration followed the letter of Section 301, which requires a formal investigation, public comment, and specific findings of unfair trade practices. Critics argue the tariffs are so broad they capture goods unrelated to forced labor, undermining the statute's intent.
The states' lawsuit also comes amid broader tensions over trade policy, with some Republicans expressing concerns about the economic impact of tariffs. Meanwhile, the administration has defended the measures as necessary to protect American workers and address unfair trade practices.
As the legal battle unfolds, businesses and importers are bracing for continued uncertainty. The case is expected to move quickly, with both sides seeking expedited review.
