NEW YORK, May 8 (Reuters) – The Trump administration on Friday appealed a court ruling that found a 10% global tariff imposed in February was not justified under a 1970s trade law.
The U.S. Court of International Trade ruled on Thursday in a 2-1 decision that Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act was not meant to address trade deficits that occur when the U.S. imports more goods than it exports. The court, however, only blocked the tariffs for three importers that sued – two small businesses and the state of Washington.
While the ruling applies to a set of levies due to expire in about two months, it marks another setback for Trump’s global tariff ambitions and comes a week before he is due to discuss trade tensions with Chinese President Xi Jinping in Beijing.
It also sets the stage for another protracted legal battle over billions of dollars’ worth of tariff refunds, three months after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Trump’s sweeping global tariffs imposed under a national emergencies law.
Trump blamed the trade court decision on “two radical left judges” when speaking to reporters on Thursday. U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said on Friday the Trump administration expects to prevail in the appeal, although he also expressed confidence in earlier tariffs that were ultimately invalidated by the U.S. Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court ruled in February that Trump had no authority to impose the earlier tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, leading Trump to impose replacement tariffs of 10% on all imports using Section 122 of the Trade Act.
The new tariffs were a temporary replacement, and they were due to expire on July 24 unless extended by Congress.
The Trump administration still plans broader tariffs on major trading partners by invoking a third law that has withstood numerous legal challenges, Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, which covers unfair trade practices. It has three Section 301 tariff investigations underway due for completion in July.
(Reporting by Dietrich Knauth; Editing by Rod Nickel and Sanjeev Miglani)
Comments