US Trade Court Strikes Down Trump’s Sweeping 10% Global Tariffs

In a significant setback for President Donald Trump’s trade agenda, the US Court of International Trade ruled on Thursday against the administration’s across-the-board 10% tariffs on imports from around the world.

The court sided primarily with small businesses that had mounted a legal challenge against the duties, which entered into force on February 24. In a 2-1 decision, the judges determined that the broad tariffs could not be justified under a provision of a 1970s trade law. One judge, however, cautioned that it might be premature to declare a full victory for the plaintiffs.

The small business plaintiffs contended that the new tariffs represented an effort to circumvent a landmark US Supreme Court ruling that had invalidated Trump’s earlier 2025 tariffs. Those previous measures were imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

In issuing the February order, President Trump invoked Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. This section permits the imposition of duties for a maximum of 150 days to address serious balance-of-payments deficits or to prevent an imminent depreciation of the US dollar.

ALSO READ : Tensions Flare in Hormuz Strait as Trump Insists Ceasefire Holds

The court’s Thursday ruling concluded that this legal provision was not suited to tackle the types of trade deficits cited in the president’s February directive. The decision underscores ongoing judicial scrutiny of the administration’s use of emergency and temporary trade authorities to implement wide-ranging tariff policies.

This latest court intervention highlights the tension between executive trade actions and statutory limits on presidential authority in international commerce. Small businesses, which argued the tariffs imposed undue burdens, secured a favorable outcome in the initial ruling, potentially opening the door for further legal challenges or policy adjustments.

The development arrives amid broader debates over US trade strategy and its impact on domestic enterprises and global supply chains. While the ruling deals a blow to the 10% global tariff measure, the divided nature of the decision suggests the legal battle may continue. Legal observers note that appeals or refined policy approaches could follow as the administration seeks avenues to advance its trade objectives within the bounds of existing law.