In a significant decision issued on May 28, 2025, the United States Court of International Trade ruled that certain wide-ranging tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) exceeded the authority granted to him by Congress. The court found that IEEPA does not give the president unilateral power to levy tariffs on nearly all foreign imports because such authority is reserved for Congress under the Constitution, and it halted the imposition of these tariffs.

The case, brought by private plaintiffs and 12 U.S. states, challenged the Trafficking Tariffs, which were generally set at 25% for Canadian and Mexican products and at 20% for Chinese products, as well as the Worldwide and Retaliatory Tariffs (also called Reciprocal Tariffs), imposed in April 2025, which included a general 10% duty on imports from “all trading partners” and higher rates (ranging as high as 50%) for specific countries, including significant increases on China.

The court found that the Worldwide and Retaliatory Tariffs exceeded the president’s delegated powers because they did not conform to the limitations set by Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. Additionally, the court determined that the Trafficking Tariffs failed to meet IEEPA’s requirement that presidential actions must directly address the specific emergency threat for which they were declared, rejecting the government’s argument that using tariffs as leverage was sufficient.

The court held that IEEPA does not authorize any of the Trafficking Tariffs or Worldwide and Retaliatory Tariffs. Accordingly, the court granted the plaintiffs’ motions for summary judgment against the United States, vacated the tariff orders at issue, and permanently enjoined (stopped) their enforcement across the United States. The court’s decision affects all interested parties who were previously subject to these IEEPA tariffs, even if they were not party to the lawsuit.

Importantly, this decision does not affect President Trump’s other tariffs, like the Section 301 tariffs on China, Section 232 tariffs on aluminum and steel, or Section 232 tariffs on automobiles and auto parts. Nor does this affect duties imposed under anti-dumping and countervailing duty orders.

Next Steps

The court also ordered the government to issue within 10 calendar days the necessary administrative orders to effectuate the court’s decision. However, the government filed a notice of appeal shortly after the opinion was released, requesting that tariffs continue to be collected during the pendency of the appeal. The appeal will be heard by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC).

On May 29, 2025, the CAFC ordered a temporary administrative stay of the lower court’s injunction while it considers the government’s full motion and parties’ briefings. Under this temporary stay, U.S. Customs will continue to collect tariffs and importers will continue to pay the IEEPA tariffs while the CAFC deliberates on the parties’ arguments. We expect CAFC to release its initial decision in June on whether the IEEPA tariffs will continue to be collected for the duration of the appeal. We urge importers to follow this initial decision closely, as well as anticipated instructions for requesting refunds of duties paid, if and when applicable.

In addition to the appeal, it is possible the U.S. will take other legal measures available to it to impose tariffs.

Contact your Akerman Customs and Trade team for more information on the rapidly changing tariff environment.