Court Blocks Trump Tariffs: What the CIT Ruling Means for Global Businesses

On May 28, 2025, the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) issued a sweeping rebuttal of President Trump’s tariffs, imposed under the auspices of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 (IEEPA). The court declared that the tariffs were unlawful on both statutory and constitutional grounds. The impact on businesses engaged in cross-border trade, will be dependent upon whether or not a stay is granted.

Summary of the Decision 

The CIT issued a strong rebuttal of former President Trump’s imposition of global and retaliatory tariffs under IEEPA. The court ruled that IEEPA does not authorize an unbounded delegation of tariff-setting authority to the executive branch. The “Liberation Day” tariffs—10% duties imposed on nearly all U.S. trading partners—were based on a declared national emergency tied to trade imbalances. The CIT found that such matters fall under the narrower congressional delegation in Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. As a result, the court held that using IEEPA to impose indefinite, wide-reaching tariffs constituted an unconstitutional overreach of executive power. The President’s invocation of IEEPA to impose unbounded tariffs that were unlimited by duration or scope was ruled to exceed any tariff authority delegated to the President.

With respect to the “Trafficking Tariffs” (fentanyl and border security), the CIT first rejected the government’s claim that the Court refrain from adjudicating the matter under the political question doctrine. The Court ruled that these tariffs did not meet IEEPA’s statutory criteria for “deal[ing] with” the specific threats they invoke. The court found no reasonable relationship between the tariffs and their stated goal of creating pressure to alter criminal behavior that allegedly posed a national security threat. 

Court Order and Government Response 

The CIT issued a judgment permanently enjoining the worldwide, retaliatory, and trafficking tariffs as ultra vires and contrary to law. The Court Judgment orders the U.S. to implement the decision within 10 calendar days from entry—by June 7, 2025. In response, the U.S. government filed an immediate Notice of Appeal and a Motion to Stay enforcement of the judgment. As of this writing, no hearing has been scheduled on the motion to stay. 

Impact on Business—Path forward Dependent Upon Stay

If the stay is not granted, the government must lift the tariffs by June 7. In that case, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is expected to issue guidance to the trade community. This will include information regarding affected entries and procedures for refund eligibility. 

If a stay is granted and tariffs remain, it will be business as (un)usual for those entering goods into the US. All tariffs will continue to apply to goods upon entry for consumption.

Recommended Next Steps for Importers 

Regardless of the outcome of the stay, businesses must remain vigilant. We strongly suggest calendaring Protest deadlines so businesses can preserve their rights to seek refunds once the decision becomes final.   

Companies that fail to file timely protests risk forfeiting potential refunds. With litigation ongoing and the legal landscape shifting, businesses must be proactive in protecting their rights and evaluating strategic options. 

How Leake Andersson Can Help 

Leake Andersson’s International Trade & Business team is monitoring this evolving situation. Our team is available to assist businesses in evaluating exposure and developing strategy in light of this ruling. For companies impacted by the Trump tariffs, this ruling presents a critical window for action. 

To discuss how this decision may affect your business, contact Principal Partner Eddy Hayes.