Lawsuit Claims Trump Lacks Constitutional Power to Impose Emergency Tariffs
Twelve states led by Oregon have filed a lawsuit challenging President Trump’s authority to impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. The suit seeks to halt his emergency order and enjoin agencies from enforcing it.
Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield called the on-again-off-again tariffs an “unprecedented misuse of emergency powers.” “The President has a tremendous amount of power, but he, just like everyone else, must follow our Constitution and our laws,” Rayfield said.
In a press conference, Rayfield said, the President’s trade policy feels “more like the whims of an angsty teenager than it does a well-reasoned, thought out economic policy.”
States listed as plaintiffs in the lawsuit filed April 23 in the U.S. Court of International Trade are Oregon, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York and Vermont. Rayfield has conducted a series of public hearings along with AGs from other states.
California Governor Gavin Newsom has initiated his own legal action against tariffs, alleging they could cost billions in revenue for the largest importing state in the country.
Lawsuit Follows Tariff Chaos
The impetus for the legal action comes from the negative impact generated by tariffs and threats of tariffs. Consumer prices and business that rely on imports or exports are being negatively affected. The impact is especially acute in trade-dependent states like Oregon.
“By claiming the authority to impose immense and ever-changing tariffs on whatever goods entering the United States he chooses, for whatever reason he finds convenient to declare an emergency, the President has upended the constitutional order and brought chaos to the American economy,” the lawsuit says.
Connecticut Attorney General William Tong said, “Trump’s lawless and chaotic tariffs are a massive tax on Connecticut families and a disaster for Connecticut businesses and jobs.”
Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes called Trump’s tariff scheme “insane” and “not only economically reckless, but illegal.”
After a Rose Garden announcement of reciprocal tariffs on more than 60 countries, the national and global uproar prompted Trump to pause them while raising tariffs even higher on China and maintaining basic 10 percent tariff on many nations.
Arguments for Tariffs Falter
Trump and his allies have offered varying rationale for tariffs. Trump claims they will return manufacturing jobs to the United States. Trump invoked the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, claiming the “hollowing out of” of U.S. manufacturing poses a national emergency.
Responding to California’s lawsuit, White House spokesperson Kush Desai said the Trump administration “remains committed to addressing this national emergency that’s decimating America’s industries and leaving our workers behind with every tool at our disposal, from tariffs to negotiations.”
Peter Navarro, Trump’s top trade advisor, has promised tariffs will generate $6 trillion in revenue., which critics have called unrealistic. Congressional Republicans say Trump’s tariffs are the opening salvo to combat unfair foreign trade practices.
A Senate measure, supported by Democrats and four GOP senators, passed that would revoke Trump’s executive order declaring a tariff emergency. Speaker Mike Johnson has declined to consider the measure in the House.
However, so far, tariffs have caused the stock market to plummet, the dollar to sink in value and longstanding trading partners to look for alternative sources of imports and exports. National media stories hint that the White House is reconsidering its “reciprocal” tariff policy.
What the Lawsuit Actually Alleges
The introduction of the Rayfield and AGs legal action says:
“The Constitution assigns to Congress, not the President, the ‘Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises.’ Yet over the last three month, the President has imposed, modified, escalated and suspended tariffs by executive order, memoranda, social media post and agency decree.
“These edicts reflect a national trade policy that now hinges on the President’s whims rather than the sound exercise of his lawful authority. By claiming the authority to impose immense and ever-changing tariffs on whatever goods entering the United States he chooses, for whatever reason he finds convenient to declare an emergency, the President has upended the constitutional order and brought chaos to the American economy.
“Because these tariffs are unlawful, this Court should declare that they are not in force, enjoin the Defendant agencies and officers from enforcing them and vacate the agency actions implementing them.”
Business, Labor Support for Rayfield Suit
The Oregonian reported several Oregon small business owners joined Rayfield as he announced the lawsuit, saying the federal tariffs risked their investments and livelihoods.
“The pharmaceutical supply chain is global,” said Pat Hubbell, owner of Brooklyn Pharmacy, which has been in business since 1897. Hubbell said tariffs will raise his costs by 15 percent and sales contracts prevent pharmacies from easily passing along tariff cost increases. “Can I weather this storm? I don’t know,” Hubbell said.
Also joining Rayfield was Oregon AFL-CIO President Graham Trainor, who said tariffs can be an “effective tool to protect jobs in industry” but that the Trump tariffs are “reckless.” “They’re chaotic and they’re devastating for workers,” he said. “This on-again, off-again tariff policy is hitting industries like manufacturing, agriculture and construction. Workers are left wondering if their jobs will still exist tomorrow.”
Rayfield’s AG website cites experts who predict tariffs will raise the cost of living for the average family by more than $3,800 a year, essentially imposing a sales tax on Oregonians, something that Oregonians have voted down for years.
