A federal judge invalidated the latest 10% global tariffs imposed under former President Donald Trump, responding to a lawsuit led by Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes and a coalition of nearly two dozen states. The court found that the tariffs were unauthorized and exceeded the powers granted by law, protecting families and businesses from the additional costs caused by these duties.
The ruling focused on the interpretation of Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which empowers the president to impose tariffs only to address “large and serious balance-of-payment deficits.” The Trump administration had cited this provision to justify tariffs aimed at general trade deficits, but the court determined that a trade deficit and a balance-of-payment deficit are distinct economic concepts. By conflating the two, the president unlawfully extended his tariff authority.
This judgment marks the second major legal setback for Trump’s tariff policies. Earlier, the Supreme Court struck down a similar tariff attempt under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. The current ruling declares the 10% tariffs invalid and explicitly unreconciled with the law. The coalition, which included 20 attorneys general and two governors alongside Arizona, argued these tariffs raised consumer costs and increased uncertainty in the economy.
Attorney General Mayes stated the decision reinforces the principle that the president must operate within legal limits and vowed to continue challenging measures that harm the economy and consumer finances. The Coalition’s legal victory not only rescinded the tariffs but also set a precedent limiting executive overreach in trade policy enforcement.