25 Democratic-led US states sue Trump administration over new tariffs on 60 trading partners
The Facts
- Twenty-five Democratic-led US states filed a lawsuit on Aug. 3, 2026, at the US Court of International Trade in New York challenging the Trump administration's latest tariffs.
- The contested tariffs, set at 10% or 12.5%, apply to imports from 60 trading partners, including the European Union, and took effect on July 24 under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974.
- The administration justified the duties by saying the affected countries and the EU had not done enough to curb exports of goods produced with forced labour.
- The states allege the administration exceeded its legal authority and violated the Administrative Procedure Act, and that the forced-labour investigation was a pretext to reimpose tariffs courts had already rejected.
- The coalition asks the court to declare the tariffs unlawful, block them, and order refunds of duties already paid.
- The lawsuit is led by the attorneys general of California (Rob Bonta), Arizona (Kris Mayes) and Oregon (Dan Rayfield), and includes states such as New York, New Jersey, Illinois, Colorado and Minnesota, plus the governors of Kentucky and Pennsylvania.
- The states say the tariffs will raise prices for consumers and businesses; the 60 affected trading partners account for about 99% of US imports, and the affected countries include Brazil, the United Kingdom, China, India and EU members.
- This is the third legal basis the administration has used for broad tariffs; the Supreme Court struck down most of Trump's earlier emergency-powers tariffs in February 2026, and the new duties took effect just as the temporary 10% global tariff used after that ruling was expiring.
- Separate legal challenges to the same July tariffs were filed by US small businesses before the states acted.
Context
What is Section 301 and why did the administration use it?
Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 lets the US Trade Representative act against foreign practices it deems unfair. After the Supreme Court struck down most of Trump's tariffs imposed under emergency economic powers in February 2026, the administration in March opened Section 301 investigations into 59 countries and the European Union over forced labour in supply chains, then used those findings to impose the 10%–12.5% duties in July as the earlier temporary global tariff was set to lapse infobae,EL PAÍS,Terra.
How has the administration responded to the lawsuit?
White House spokesman Kush Desai said the United States is 'using its legal authority' to address the issue BBC. The administration has maintained that the tariffs are grounded in trade practices of other countries La Nacion.
What happened to the money collected under the tariffs the Supreme Court struck down?
The government collected roughly $165 billion under the tariffs the Supreme Court ruled illegal in February 2026 and has refunded about $100 billion — around 60% — according to figures customs officials reported to the Court of International Trade Guardian,National Post. Canadian exporters alone are owed roughly $10 billion, according to National Post National Post.
Where Left and Right agree, and where they split
- Where Left and Right agree
- The duties are sweeping — 10% or 12.5% on partners supplying about 99% of US imports — and their legality now rests with a court rather than with either side's assertion.
- Where Left and Right split
- Left and right split: a workaround for tariffs courts rejected, or federal leverage states shouldn't undo?
How left and right read it
Twenty-five Democratic-led states went to the Court of International Trade on Aug. 3 to stop tariffs of 10% or 12.5% on trading partners supplying about 99% of US imports. Tariff income gets counted as revenue. It is paid by consumers and businesses here. Reviving duties the Supreme Court already rejected, now on a third legal theory, is a workaround — the court should declare it unlawful and order the money refunded.
“However, the deficit has grown after narrowing last year thanks to rising tax revenue and tariff income.” — The Guardian
Sixty trading partners — about 99% of what America imports — have faced 10% or 12.5% duties since July 24 for failing to keep goods made with forced labour out of their supply chains. That is reciprocity. Twenty-five state attorneys general and two governors now ask a court to void that leverage and refund it; the conduct of foreign commerce belongs to the national government, not to a coalition of state litigants.
“President Donald Trump's administration is facing 25 new lawsuits from Democrat-led states over his latest round of tariffs on Monday.” — Fox Business
This isn't a fight about 10% versus 12.5% — it's about who decides when a fresh legal theory is a genuine authority or a detour around a ruling.
The receipts — 100 sources
Wire services (3)
Independent coverage (97)
The news, read by both sides.
The day’s biggest stories in one short brief, built to show both sides and the competing values behind the headlines. Free in your inbox.