New tariffs imposed by the U.S. government won't take effect until August 7, as stated by a government official.
In an ongoing legal saga, the former U.S. President Donald Trump's administration has faced challenges regarding the legality of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) of 1977. The key litigation involves the "fentanyl" and reciprocal tariffs imposed by executive orders, particularly those affecting imports from Canada.
The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia initially ruled in Learning Resources v. Trump on May 29, 2025, that IEEPA did not authorize the President to impose these tariffs. However, this ruling only applied to the named plaintiffs.
Simultaneously, on May 28, 2025, the Court of International Trade (CIT) declared the executive orders imposing the "fentanyl" tariffs on Canada, China, and Mexico, as well as the reciprocal tariffs, invalid and permanently enjoined them as contrary to law. Following this decision, the Trump administration sought a stay of the injunction.
On the same day, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued an immediate administrative stay of the CIT's judgment and injunction, allowing the tariffs to remain in effect while the appeal proceeds. The plaintiffs had until June 5, 2025, to respond to the government's motion for a stay, with a reply due from the government by June 9, 2025.
As of early August 2025, these tariffs remain in effect due to the stay, pending appellate review. It is worth noting that President Trump has continued to modify and expand the reciprocal tariffs through executive orders, invoking his authority under IEEPA and related statutes.
The White House announced a tariff rate of 10% on imports from countries not listed, except for Canada. As of August 1, Canada will face a tariff rate of 35% on imports into the United States. The justification for the higher tariff on Canada was insufficient action against drug trafficking.
The appellate judges have expressed skepticism about the government's use of an emergency law for tariffs, as it does not mention the word "tariffs" anywhere. The decision in the case could take several weeks, and the legal dispute could continue and potentially reach the Supreme Court.
The ongoing dispute between Trump and the Canadian government on multiple issues further complicates the situation. The tariffs have been a point of contention, with both parties yet to reach a resolution. The future of these tariffs will likely be decided by the appellate court, as they consider whether to maintain the stay or allow the injunctions to take effect.
[1] Source: Court of International Trade [2] Source: White House Press Release [3] Source: Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
- The ongoing legal dispute revolves around the Trump administration's use of policy-and-legislation, specifically the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) of 1977, in imposing tariffs, a matter that has escalated into politics and general news.
- The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in considering the government's motion for a stay, has shown skepticism about the administration's justification for using an emergency law like IEEPA for tariff imposition, given the lack of explicit mention of "tariffs" in the law.
