US small businesses sue Trump administration over new ‘forced labour’ tariffs

Lead

Two US small businesses filed a lawsuit on Friday challenging President Donald Trump's latest round of tariffs on goods from 60 trading partners, arguing that the new policy, like most of Trump's previous tariffs, exceeded the president's authority to tax imports. The lawsuit, filed in the US trade court in New York, contends that the tariffs require more detailed country-specific findings about forced labor to be legally justified.

Coverage Comparison

Reporting from Al Jazeera and the South China Morning Post both detailed the legal challenge, focusing on the plaintiffs' assertion that the tariffs go beyond presidential powers. Al Jazeera's coverage highlighted the argument that the new policy, like previous tariffs, is beyond the president's authority, and noted that the US Supreme Court had previously ruled against such tariffs. The South China Morning Post's reporting was more neutral in tone, framing the lawsuit as a direct challenge to the administration's trade policy without emphasizing the broader legal implications.

Both outlets reported the same core facts: the tariffs were imposed on 60 trading partners, including the European Union, at rates of 10 percent and 12.5 percent, over allegations that these countries were not doing enough to stop exports of goods produced with forced labor. The new tariffs took effect just as a temporary 10 percent global tariff expired.

Key Claims

The lawsuit argues that the new tariffs require more detailed country-specific findings about forced labor to be legally justified. The two small businesses, backed by a non-profit legal group that previously sued over earlier tariff rounds, assert that the president is attempting to reimpose tariffs that were already ruled illegal by the US Supreme Court.

The Trump administration imposed new tariffs of 10 percent and 12.5 percent on 60 trading partners, including the European Union, over allegations that they were not doing enough to stop the export of goods produced with forced labor. These tariffs took effect just as a temporary 10 percent global tariff expired.

According to the South China Morning Post, the US Supreme Court ruled against most of Trump's widest-ranging tariffs on February 20, finding that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) does not authorize the president to unilaterally impose tariffs on trading partners. Trump responded to that ruling by criticizing the court and imposing a new temporary 10 percent global tariff under different legal authority.

Trump has made tariffs a central pillar of his foreign policy, using them as leverage to negotiate trade deals around the globe. The legal challenge comes amid ongoing tensions over trade policy and the administration's use of executive authority to impose tariffs.