U.S. Trade Court rules Trump’s 10% global tariff invalid

```

According to media reports, the U.S. International Trade Court ruled on Thursday that the global 10% tariff imposed by Trump under a 1970s trade law lacks legal basis.

The court, with a 2-1 decision, sided with a group of small business plaintiffs, determining that the tariffs did not meet the applicable conditions stipulated by the relevant law.

The tariffs in question officially took effect on February 24 this year. One dissenting judge argued that it was premature to rule in favor of the plaintiffs at this time.

This ruling means that the Trump administration’s attempt to maintain its tariff regime through another legal channel has encountered setbacks, and may have a direct impact on import costs for businesses and market expectations regarding the direction of trade policy.

Legal basis denied, plaintiffs allege attempt to circumvent prior Supreme Court ruling

In his executive order in February, Trump invoked Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. This provision allows the government to impose tariffs under certain conditions, for a maximum duration of 150 days, applicable in situations including correcting serious international balance of payments deficits or preventing imminent significant depreciation of the U.S. dollar.

The court found in its ruling that the trade deficit issue cited by Trump in the executive order did not fall within the applicable conditions targeted by the provision, and thus the tariff measures lacked a legitimate legal foundation.

The small businesses who filed the lawsuit argued that Trump’s citation of Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 was essentially an attempt to circumvent a previous key Supreme Court decision. That decision had already overturned tariffs imposed by Trump in 2025 under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).

The core dispute in this lawsuit is: in the context of the Supreme Court having already issued a restrictive ruling on IEEPA tariffs, can the government turn to another legal authorization to achieve a similar purpose. The court’s latest decision clearly denied this approach.

The invalidated 10% global tariff was one component of the Trump administration’s 2025 tariff policy framework. The court’s ruling further narrows the administration’s room to unilaterally impose broad tariffs under the current trade law framework.

Risk Warning and Disclaimer ClauseThe market has risks; investment requires caution. This article does not constitute personal investment advice and has not taken into account individual users’ specific investment goals, financial situation, or needs. Users should consider whether any opinions, views, or conclusions in this article are suitable for their particular circumstances. Investments made based on this article are at your own risk. ```