Trump vs. Federal Courts — Two Court Tries to Block Tariffs, Trump Considers a New Legal Path

TradingKey - In just two days, the Trump administration’s tariff plan has faced setbacks from two U.S. federal courts. Although a federal appeals court granted a temporary stay and reinstated the tariffs for now, the White House is aware that its strategy is under legal threat — and is reportedly exploring an untested provision in U.S. trade law.

On Thursday, May 29, one day after President Trump swiftly appealed a preliminary injunction issued by the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) blocking his tariff measures, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals granted the appeal — temporarily allowing Trump’s tariffs to remain in effect.

The appellate court did not specify how long the order would last, but it set a briefing schedule ending on June 9, requiring both the Trump administration and the CIT to submit written arguments on whether the tariffs should be allowed to proceed.

While the CIT’s halt on Trump’s tariffs was paused, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia delivered another blow on Thursday: it issued a separate injunction preventing the administration from imposing tariffs on two Illinois-based toy importers, citing the argument that Congress never authorized the president to impose such tariffs independently.

In both cases, the courts cited the same core legal reasoning: the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which Trump used to justify declaring a national emergency and imposing reciprocal tariffs, does not authorize the president to levy tariffs — effectively ruling that Trump overstepped his authority.

Trump Seeks Plan B

According to The Wall Street Journal, these rulings have made the Trump administration realize that its reliance on IEEPA as a legal basis for tariffs is being challenged — forcing it to look for alternative legal tools to preserve its trade policy agenda.

Sources indicate that Trump’s team is considering an unused provision under the 1974 Trade Act, which allows the president to impose up to 15% tariffs within a 150-day window to address trade imbalances with foreign partners. This clause could also enable customized tariffs targeting different trading nations.

This approach would involve a lengthy notice-and-comment process, making it more legally defensible than the current use of IEEPA, which courts have already ruled unconstitutional in this context.

Other Legal Tools Already in Use

In addition to IEEPA, the Trump administration has previously relied on Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 to impose tariffs on products like steel, aluminum, automobiles, and auto parts. It has also launched investigations into trucks, copper, semiconductors, pharmaceuticals, and aircraft, and is preparing broad tariffs on smartphones and jet engines.

 National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett said the administration has multiple ways to impose tariffs — but for now, it has no immediate plans to switch strategies.

Trade advisor Peter Navarro added that any experienced trade lawyer knows there are many legal avenues available to pursue the administration's goals.