US trade court blocks Trump's 10% global tariffs under 1974 Trade Act
Consensus Summary
A US trade court ruled 2-1 on May 7–8, 2026, that Donald Trump’s 10% universal tariffs on imports lacked legal justification under the Trade Act of 1974, siding with small business plaintiffs. The tariffs, imposed February 24, 2026, for 150 days, were part of Trump’s response to the Supreme Court’s February 2026 strike-down of his broader 2025 tariffs, which ranged from 10% to 49% across 180 countries. The ruling applies only to the plaintiffs, leaving tariffs in place for other importers until July 24, 2026. While ABC highlights the court’s rejection of states’ requests to block tariffs and a dissenting judge’s broader interpretation of presidential authority, Guardian adds context on Trump’s parallel threats to raise EU tariffs to 25% (from 15%) over trade deal delays and his call with von der Leyen, which also addressed Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Both sources agree the decision is another legal setback for Trump’s protectionist trade agenda.
✓ Verified by 2+ sources
Key details reported by multiple sources:
- A US Court of International Trade ruled 2-1 against Donald Trump’s 10% universal tariffs on imports, citing lack of justification under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974
- The tariffs were imposed on February 24, 2026, and were set to expire on July 24, 2026, under a 150-day provision
- The ruling applies only to the plaintiffs (small businesses) and does not block tariffs for other importers until July 24, 2026
- Trump invoked Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 to justify the tariffs, citing trade deficits and dollar depreciation risks
- The Supreme Court struck down Trump’s broader 2025 tariffs (under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act) in February 2026
- The 10% tariffs applied to imports from over 180 countries, including a 10% baseline rate on Australian exports
Points of Difference
Details reported by only one source:
- The court rejected a request from 24 mostly Democrat-led US states to block tariffs for all importers, ruling they lacked standing as non-payers
- The third judge dissented, arguing the president had broader leeway under the law
- The White House has not yet commented on the ruling and could appeal
- Trump’s 2025 ‘Liberation Day’ tariffs ranged from 10% (baseline) to 49% for Cambodia and 48% for Laos
- Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese called the 2025 tariffs ‘entirely unjustified’ and ‘not a friendly act’
- Trump announced a new deadline (July 4, 2026) for the EU to implement trade deal commitments before raising tariffs on EU goods (e.g., cars) to ‘much higher levels’
- Trump raised EU vehicle tariffs from 15% to 25% on May 3, 2026, citing non-compliance with a July 2025 Scotland deal
- The EU deal required zero tariffs on US industrial goods and duty-free quotas for US farm/seafood products, but EU legislation stalled in Parliament
- Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen also discussed Iran’s nuclear program during their call
Contradictions
Conflicting information between sources:
- ABC states the tariffs were imposed in February 2026, while Guardian does not specify the exact date but confirms they took effect on February 24, 2026
- ABC mentions a ‘panel of judges’ ruling two-to-one, while Guardian refers to the ‘court’ ruling 2-1 with one judge calling the victory ‘premature’ for plaintiffs
- ABC notes the dissenting judge found the law allowed the president ‘more leeway’ on tariffs, while Guardian does not detail the dissent’s specific reasoning
Source Articles
Breaking: US trade court rules against Trump's 10pc tariff rate
A United States trade court rules against President Donald Trump's universal 10 per cent tariff rate, dealing another blow to his signature economic policy.
US trade court rules against Trump’s 10% global tariffs
Trump also issues new deadline for EU to implement trade deal terms before raising tariffs to ‘much higher levels’ The US trade court on Thursday ruled against Donald Trump’s latest 10% global tariffs, finding across-the-board tariffs were not justified under a 1970s trade law. The US Court of International Trade ruled in favor of small businesses that challenged the tariffs, which took effect on 24 February. The ruling was 2-1, with one judge saying it was premature to grant victory to the smal