In brief
A new lawsuit filed by the Liberty Justice Center challenges the Trump administration’s 50% tariffs on $20 billion of Canadian imports, arguing that the White House exceeded its authority under Section 338 of the Tariff Act. The suit, lodged in the U.S. Court of International Trade, seeks refunds with interest for affected American importers and claims the tariffs caused immediate harm to U.S. firms. It also questions whether Canada’s retaliatory duties justified the executive’s actions. The case underscores ongoing tensions in the U.S.–Canada trade dispute and raises questions about the limits of presidential tariff power.
Donald Trump’s administration is facing a fresh legal challenge over the 50% tariffs imposed on a $20 billion tranche of Canadian goods, a move the Liberty Justice Center claims oversteps the executive's authority and smacks American businesses into financial difficulty.
The White House levied the steep duties after trade talks with Canada broke down in August, citing "unequal treatment" of U.S. cars, dairy and alcohol. Trump’s tariffs, enforced under Section 338 of the 1930 Tariff Act, have triggered a string of Canadian retaliatory measures—including matching the duties dollar for dollar on U.S. imports such as cheese.
In the lawsuit, the Liberty Justice Center argues that the executive branch failed to observe the 30‑day waiting period required by Section 338 before imposing the Canadian levies. It seeks refunds, with interest, for affected importers and files for a preliminary injunction to halt collection.
Thomas Gellert, co‑CEO of New Jersey‑based Gellert Global Group, a family food business that has paid the tariffs on cheese exports, noted the sudden cost surge “disrupts relationships overnight and ripples through the entire supply chain.”
“No president should pull a dormant statute from the shelf and impose sweeping tariffs without Congress’s clear limits,” said Liberty Justice Center chief executive Sara Albrecht. The group contends Section 338 has been superseded by Section 301 of the 1974 Trade Act, leaving the U.S. executive with no legal justification for the 50% duties.
Trump’s tariffs have already faced legal setbacks, most notably a 2024 Supreme Court ruling that struck down a separate set of duties imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. The new case adds to a portfolio of lawsuits that challenge the president’s trade‑policy authority.
For now, the lawsuit remains pending, with the court yet to rule on the preliminary injunction. The outcome could set a precedent for the extent of executive power in future trade disputes.
