25 states sue Trump administration over latest round of tariffs

A coalition of 25 U.S. states has filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration, challenging a new round of tariffs imposed on dozens of countries and arguing that the White House exceeded its legal authority in introducing the measures.

The lawsuit, filed on Monday, August 3, 2026, seeks to block the latest import duties, which target 60 economies with tariff rates ranging between 10% and 12.5%.

The legal challenge marks the latest confrontation between Democratic-led states and the Trump administration over its use of executive powers to reshape U.S. trade policy.

The coalition filed the case at the U.S. Court of International Trade, arguing that the administration improperly relied on Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 to impose the new tariffs.

Section 301 authorises the U.S. President to impose tariffs or other trade sanctions against countries found to engage in unfair trade practices that burden American commerce.

However, the states contend that the latest tariffs fall outside the scope of that authority and were introduced without proper legal justification.

Announcing the lawsuit, California Attorney General Rob Bonta accused the administration of repeatedly misusing presidential powers to impose tariffs that ultimately increase costs for American households and businesses.

This is President Trump's third attempt to illegally impose tariffs that would make life more expensive for American families and small businesses, and this is the third time we're taking the administration to court over this misuse of power," Bonta said.

The coalition argues that the tariffs function as a tax on imported goods, costs that are often passed on to consumers through higher retail prices.

The Trump administration has defended the policy, insisting that the tariffs were lawfully introduced to address unfair international trade practices.

According to the White House, several trading partners have failed to adequately prevent the export of goods produced through forced labour, creating an unfair competitive advantage that harms American workers and manufacturers.

White House spokesperson Kush Desai said the administration was acting within its legal authority.

The United States is using its lawful authority to obtain the elimination of unreasonable acts, policies and practices that burden U.S. commerce."

He added that countries which fail to prohibit or effectively enforce restrictions on imports produced with forced labour create an unreasonable burden on U.S. trade, making the use of Section 301 tariffs appropriate.

Desai further argued that Section 301 tariffs have withstood previous legal scrutiny since President Trump's first term and remain a legitimate policy tool.

The lawsuit alleges that the new tariffs are not genuinely intended to combat forced labour but are instead an attempt to replace previous import levies that were struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court earlier this year.

According to the states, the investigation conducted by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) before the tariffs were imposed was rushed and too broad in scope, resulting in unjustified tariff increases affecting numerous countries.

The coalition is asking the court to declare the tariffs unlawful and prevent their implementation.

State officials argue that the new duties could increase costs for businesses that rely on imported goods and eventually lead to higher prices for consumers across the United States.

Bonta maintained that trade policy should remain within the limits established by Congress and warned against using executive authority to impose what he described as unlawful taxes.

Tariffs are taxes, and the American people cannot and should not shoulder the extra costs that come from the president's failed and illegal economic policy — no matter how much the President wants them to."

The outcome of the case could have significant implications for U.S. trade policy, presidential authority under Section 301, and the future use of tariffs as an economic and foreign policy tool.