{"id":35856,"date":"2026-05-08T00:49:30","date_gmt":"2026-05-07T23:49:30","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/kaizen-blog.org\/?p=35856"},"modified":"2026-05-08T03:29:32","modified_gmt":"2026-05-08T02:29:32","slug":"schwere-niederlage-fuer-trump-bundesgericht-erklaert-auch-seine-neuen-weltzoelle-fuer-illegal","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/kaizen-blog.org\/en\/schwere-niederlage-fuer-trump-bundesgericht-erklaert-auch-seine-neuen-weltzoelle-fuer-illegal\/","title":{"rendered":"Heavy Defeat for Trump - Federal Court Also Declares His New Global Tariffs Illegal"},"content":{"rendered":"

Donald Trump has suffered another major defeat in court. Only a few months after the Supreme Court\u2019s clear ruling against his original punitive tariffs, the US Court of International Trade in New York has now declared the president\u2019s new global tariffs unlawful as well. Judges Gary S. Katzmann, Jane A. Restani and Timothy M. Reif concluded in a 2-1 decision that Trump had once again exceeded his authority.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The ruling was issued by the US Court of International Trade in New York. Two of the three judges, Gary S. Katzmann and Jane A. Restani, declared the worldwide ten percent tariffs \u201cinvalid\u201d and \u201cnot authorized by law.\u201d Only Judge Timothy M. Reif sided with the administration, arguing that the law grants the president broader authority in trade actions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n
<\/div>\n\n\n\n

The lawsuit had been filed by small businesses, including toy company Basic Fun! and spice company Burlap & Barrel. They were supported by the Liberty Justice Center. For the companies, the ruling represents a massive victory. Basic Fun! CEO Jay Foreman openly declared after the decision: \u201cWe fought back today and we won.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The legal defeat strikes Trump at a particularly sensitive point. Tariff policy has for years been one of the central pillars of his economic and political strategy. Last year, Trump attempted to impose sweeping punitive tariffs against nearly the entire world by invoking an alleged economic emergency. At the time, he relied on the IEEPA law from 1977.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But the Supreme Court blocked that attempt at the end of February. The justices ruled that the law does not authorize such sweeping global punitive tariffs. Under the US Constitution, the authority to impose tariffs fundamentally belongs to Congress, even though certain powers can be delegated to presidents. The White House then shifted its legal strategy and introduced new worldwide ten percent tariffs under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. It is precisely this new legal framework that has now been dismantled again in court.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The consequences could be far-reaching. Trade expert Dave Townsend explained that numerous additional companies may now attempt to recover tariffs they have already paid or seek exemptions from the duties as well. At the same time, the Trump administration is expected to immediately appeal the ruling. The case would first move to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals in Washington and could ultimately return to the Supreme Court once again. Trump\u2019s chances of securing a victory there are considered extremely slim.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Particularly problematic for the White House is the political impact of the ruling. Only hours earlier, Trump had publicly given the European Union an ultimatum until July 4 and threatened new punitive tariffs if Brussels failed to fully implement the trade agreement. Now another court is once again questioning how far the president can legally go in imposing worldwide trade measures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n