U.S. Court of Appeals Rules that President Trump Exceeded His Authority as to Tariffs

In a 7-4 decision, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) ruled on August 29, 2025, that President Trump exceeded his authority when he imposed global tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). In its opinion, the Court addressed the question of whether Congress, in enacting IEEPA, intended to extend the statute’s authority to include the imposition of tariffs by use of the term “regulate” importation in response to a national emergency declared by the President.

IEEPA authorizes the President to take certain actions in response to a declared national emergency arising from an “unusual and extraordinary threat … to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States.” Once a national emergency has been declared, IEEPA then provides the President various authorities. Among those authorities and chiefly relied on by President Trump when issuing his global tariffs is the authority to regulate importation.

In its opinion, the Court noted that the language in IEEPA nowhere includes the power to impose tariffs, duties, or the like, or the power to tax. The Court further noted that there are, however, numerous other statutes that do delegate to the President the authority to impose tariffs and that the language in those statutes is clear and precise. The Court’s opinion notes: “The absence of any such tariff language in IEEPA contrasts with statutes where Congress has affirmatively granted such power and included clear limits on that power.”

Examples of additional statutes that grant the President authority to impose tariffs are:

• Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930 permits the President to “specify and declare new or additional duties.”
• Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 authorizes the President to proclaim “a temporary import surcharge…in the form of duties.”
• Section 201 of the Trade Act authorizes the President to “proclaim an increase in, or the imposition of, any duty on the imported article” or to “proclaim a tariff-rate quota.”
• Section 301 of the Trade Act allows the President to “impose duties or other import restrictions.

The CAFC remanded the case back to the Court of International Trade (CIT) to reconsider the issue of its permanent injunction, which the CAFC vacated. While the CIT revisits this issue, the global tariffs President Trump issued will remain in place.

It is widely expected that the case will ultimately be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Buchanan’s team of international trade and national security attorneys and government relations and international trade professionals is closely monitoring developments and is ready to help U.S. manufacturers with U.S. trade remedy laws and trade policy. Our dedicated team has decades of experience supporting clients across a range of industries – ranging from steel, critical minerals, mining, chemical, rubber, and agricultural products – to ensure that the U.S. market is operating under fair and equal conditions.

Authors:

Daniel B. Pickard
Email: daniel.pickard@bipc.com

Grace Elizabeth Welborn
Email: grace.welborn@bipc.com