A coalition of 25 states asked the U.S. Court of International Trade this week to strike down the Trump administration's Section 301 tariffs, a set of import duties the states say reach roughly 99.4 percent of everything the country buys from abroad. [1][2]
The tariffs impose rates of 10 to 12.5 percent on goods from more than 80 countries. [2] Pixel Politics logged the filing in an August 4 wire brief; the complaint now on the docket turns that entry into the third court challenge the coalition has mounted against the administration's global tariff program. [2]
The administration has defended the duties in part as a tool against forced labor in foreign supply chains. The states do not dispute that forced labor exists or that it is worth fighting. Their complaint says the plaintiff states "oppose forced labor in all its forms," while arguing that the administration "cannot use forced labor as a pretext" for what amounts to a tax on nearly every import. [1]
The distinction matters because Section 301 is meant to target specific unfair trade practices, not to function as a blanket levy. The states' theory is that a rationale aimed at discrete abuses cannot be stretched to cover more than 80 countries and 99.4 percent of imports without losing its legal footing. [1][2]
The plaintiffs are Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin. [2]
The Court of International Trade is the specialized federal court that hears tariff and customs disputes, which is why the coalition filed there rather than in a district court. A ruling for the states would lift duties collected on almost the entire flow of foreign goods into the country; a ruling for the administration leaves U.S. importers paying 10 to 12.5 percent at the border, a cost that generally reaches shoppers in the price of finished goods. [1][2]
