Key Takeaways
• Twelve states filed a lawsuit on April 23, 2025, challenging Trump’s 145% tariffs on Chinese imports.
• States argue only Congress can set tariffs; Trump used IEEPA emergency powers without a real emergency.
• Court’s decision could reshape presidential trade authority and affect global trade, immigration, and consumer prices.
A major legal fight is growing in the United States 🇺🇸 over President Trump’s sweeping new tariffs, as a dozen states, led by their attorneys general, have gone to court to try to stop what they call unfair and illegal tax changes. The lawsuit, filed on April 23, 2025, in the U.S. Court of International Trade in Washington, D.C., targets Trump’s use of tariffs on foreign products, including a very large 145% tax on goods from China 🇨🇳.
States Join Together Against President Trump’s Tariff Policy
Oregon, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, and Vermont are working together in this lawsuit. The states argue that President Trump’s actions shake up the country’s economy and go far beyond what a president is allowed to do. They are asking the court to declare these new tariffs illegal and to order federal agencies not to collect or enforce them.
New York Attorney General Letitia James expressed strong criticism: “The president does not have the power to raise taxes on a whim, but that’s exactly what President Trump has been doing with these tariffs.” Her comment highlights what is at the heart of the lawsuit: the belief that only Congress, not the President, can change tax rules or set tariffs, which are taxes on imported goods.
Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes called President Trump’s plan “insane” and explained, “It is not only economically reckless — it is illegal.” This case is more than states simply disagreeing with a policy; it is about what the law allows and who is supposed to be in charge.
The Lawsuit’s Legal Arguments
The legal challenge says that President Trump is using a law called the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) in a way Congress did not intend. The IEEPA gives the president certain powers only in specific emergencies—when there is a “unusual and extraordinary threat” from outside the country. However, the states say there wasn’t a real emergency and that the president used this law to get around Congress and set up tariffs whenever he wanted.
The lawsuit puts forward three simple arguments:
- Only Congress has the constitutional right to set tariffs or adjust tax rules on imports.
- The president is supposed to use the IEEPA only in true emergencies, not just because he wants to.
- President Trump has used the law in ways that seem to match his opinions or moods, instead of what’s allowed or wise.
In legal filings, the states stress that letting any president raise taxes without checks would bring “chaos” to the United States 🇺🇸 economy. They believe these moves hurt businesses, industries, and consumers across the country.
The Recent Tariff: What Happened?
President Trump signed executive orders to set a 145% tariff—that is, a 145% tax—on products coming from China 🇨🇳. This is much higher than typical tariffs and would mean the price of goods from China 🇨🇳 would likely double or even almost triple for people in the United States 🇺🇸. This move is just one among a series of other tariffs directed at foreign imports since Trump took office.
According to analysis from VisaVerge.com, the tariff policy has already sparked not only this big lawsuit but also separate legal action from small business owners. Their concerns echo the states: they find the tariffs unfair, harmful, and possibly illegal.
Other Lawsuits Add to the Pressure
Just over a week before the states filed their case, five small businesses also sued President Trump in the same court. Their lawsuit uses many of the same arguments, saying the tariffs are not legal under the Constitution or under laws like the IEEPA. They wanted the judges to quickly block the new tariffs with a temporary court order, but a panel of three judges said no to this request.
This means, for now, the tariffs will keep going while the legal battles continue. Both businesses and states are requesting the court to block the government from enforcing these tariffs while the main case is being decided.
How Will This Affect Americans?
These major legal challenges could have a wide effect on everyday life, businesses, and the country’s trade relationships. For families, big tariffs usually mean higher prices at the store, especially for products made overseas. For many businesses, it means the cost of parts or goods can soar, making it hard to stay afloat or to keep prices fair for customers.
State attorneys general warn that President Trump’s policy could:
- Force up the prices of many products, especially those imported from China 🇨🇳
- Hurt small and large businesses that rely on affordable imports
- Affect jobs, as some companies might struggle to pay workers if their expenses rise
- Cause uncertainty, since companies can’t easily plan for the future if tariff rules change without warning
Small importers and exporters in particular may face bigger risks, as seen in the separate lawsuit from five small businesses.
Trump’s Defense and White House Response
So far, the Justice Department has not released an official response to the lawsuit. This is not unusual, since government lawyers often wait to study the legal filings before giving a public answer or making formal court arguments.
The Trump administration claims its tariff actions are needed to protect American industries and respond to “unfair trade practices” in other countries, especially China 🇨🇳. President Trump has often used economic tools like tariffs as a way to pressure countries that he thinks are not trading fairly with the United States 🇺🇸.
But state officials and critics say that acting on “a whim,” or what they call last-minute decisions, is not legal or safe. They want the courts to make clear that such large changes need to go through Congress first. This, they argue, is not only the law, but also a way to protect the country from “chaos.”
Impact on Immigration and International Relations
Although the direct focus of the lawsuit is on trade and tariffs, there are also effects for people trying to move, study, or work in the United States 🇺🇸. When countries set high barriers to trade, this often leads to bad feelings and even fights between countries. For example, China 🇨🇳 could decide to answer Trump’s tariffs with its own taxes or limits on American goods and even increase rules for U.S. citizens or businesses who want to visit or operate there.
This also means immigration policy can be affected. If trade tensions grow, it might become harder for students, workers, or families from certain countries to get visas or permits. Past trade fights between the United States 🇺🇸 and other countries have sometimes caused delays or led to stricter visa policies.
Historical Background: Who Can Set Tariffs?
The United States 🇺🇸 Constitution says Congress decides when and how to tax imports. While previous presidents have sometimes used emergency powers to act during crises—such as wars or after attacks—courts have often looked at whether there really was an “emergency.” What’s unusual in this lawsuit is that the states argue there was no real emergency, just a “policy choice” by President Trump.
The International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), first passed in 1977, does give the president powers to act if there’s a serious threat from outside the country. But the law was meant for situations like terrorism, military threats, or sudden national crises. Using IEEPA for normal trade disputes is being challenged as bending the rules.
This is not the first time a president’s ability to impose tariffs has sparked a court battle. However, the size and scale of these new tariffs and the number of states involved make this case one of the most important in recent memory.
What Comes Next In the Lawsuit?
When a state (or a group of states) sues the federal government, the process can take months or even years. The first step is for both sides to file their main arguments and evidence. A single judge or a panel in the U.S. Court of International Trade will hear the case and decide if President Trump’s actions should be blocked while the court process continues.
If the court decides in favor of the states, it may stop the government from charging or collecting the new tariffs until a final decision is made. However, courts sometimes let the government keep enforcing the rules while appeals continue. Either side can bring the argument up to the Supreme Court if they lose in the lower courts.
For now, businesses, states, and foreign governments will be watching what the court says. If the court blocks Trump’s tariffs, it would be a major limit on the power of the president to act on trade issues alone.
Possible Long-Term Consequences
If courts agree with the states’ lawsuit and block President Trump’s tariffs, the decision would clarify that the president cannot use emergency powers for routine trade policy without a real crisis. It would also remind Congress and future presidents about the limits of their roles.
- If courts side with Trump, future presidents may feel able to use emergency powers more often, which could bring more sudden changes in trade and immigration policy.
- If courts side with the states, Congress might keep or strengthen its role in trade and economic decisions.
Major court cases like this one can also affect talks and deals between countries for years to come. Trade partners like China 🇨🇳 may either try to wait out U.S. changes or look for other markets.
Issues for Employers, Students, and Immigration Stakeholders
Employers who rely on parts or products from abroad will need to monitor these lawsuits closely. Depending on what happens in court, companies could face new costs, rules, or delays. Students and families from country like China 🇨🇳 may also feel the impact through changes in visa access or work opportunities.
If you’re planning to move, work, or study in the United States 🇺🇸, it’s smart to follow reliable sources. For official updates and current U.S. trade laws, you can visit the U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s trade section.
A Legal Fight About More Than Money
This is not just a fight about how much tax to charge on goods from China 🇨🇳 or any other country. It’s about the rules that keep the government in check, make sure one person does not have too much power, and protect families and businesses from big, sudden changes.
As legal arguments play out, people are watching to see how courts will balance the power of the president against the rights of Congress and the needs of everyday businesses and families.
Summary and Outlook
To sum up, twelve states have joined a lawsuit against President Trump’s new tariffs, saying they are illegal and damage the United States 🇺🇸 economy. The lawsuit points out that only Congress has the power to make tariff decisions except in a real crisis. Until the courts decide, the tariffs remain in place, and many are worried about higher prices and trouble in global trade.
This legal battle could reshape how trade and even immigration policies are handled in the future. For now, businesses, students, families, and anyone interested in America’s place in the world will want to stay alert as the story unfolds.
Learn Today
Tariff → A government tax on imported goods, which can raise prices and affect international trade and consumer costs.
IEEPA → International Emergency Economic Powers Act, a law granting the U.S. president special powers during foreign emergencies.
Attorney General → The chief legal officer representing a state’s government, often responsible for legal action on behalf of citizens.
Executive Order → An official directive by the President that manages operations of the federal government, sometimes bypassing Congress.
U.S. Court of International Trade → A federal court in Washington, D.C., handling cases about international trade and customs laws.
This Article in a Nutshell
Twelve U.S. states challenge President Trump’s 145% tariffs on Chinese goods, arguing he exceeded his authority under the IEEPA. The lawsuit claims tariffs hurt the economy and violate the Constitution. The case’s outcome could determine how future presidents use emergency powers for trade and possibly influence immigration policy.
— By VisaVerge.com
Read more:
• Trump signals major cuts to 145% China tariffs but says they stay
• Trump’s Tariffs Expected to Shrink US Economy, Raise Household Costs
• California sues Trump over sweeping trade tariffs
• Airbus assesses impact of new U.S. tariffs on industry
• Delta Air Lines refuses to pay tariffs on Airbus aircraft
