24 US States File Lawsuit to Invalidate Global Tariffs

Lawsuit Led by Democratic Districts
Distinction Between Trade Deficit and Balance of Payments Deficit
Country- and Product-Specific Exemptions Violate the Law

In the United States, 24 states have filed a lawsuit to invalidate the global tariffs newly imposed by President Donald Trump on countries around the world.

Dan Rayfield, Attorney General of Oregon, announced on the 5th (local time) that 24 states are participating in the lawsuit, which was filed with the Court of International Trade (CIT). This lawsuit targets the global tariffs imposed by President Trump under Section 122 of the Trade Act, following the Supreme Court’s decision last month on the mutual tariff invalidation on February 20.

The plaintiffs argued, “The law only permits the imposition of tariffs in limited circumstances, such as in cases of a ‘large and serious balance of payments deficit.’ However, the trade deficit cited by President Trump is a different concept from a balance of payments deficit,” adding, “President Trump is once again acting illegally.”

They further claimed that President Trump is emphasizing only negative factors such as the trade deficit, which is one component of the balance of payments, while ignoring positive elements like net capital inflows in the financial sector—a practice known as ‘cherry-picking’ (selectively choosing only what is advantageous)—to assert the justification for the tariffs.

They also argued that the balance of payments deficit under Section 122 of the Trade Act was predicated on the fixed exchange rate system in place at the time the law was enacted in 1974, and that after the end of the fixed exchange rate system in 1976, such a concept could no longer exist.

Additionally, they pointed out that Section 122 of the Trade Act stipulates that tariffs must be applied uniformly across all products without discrimination between countries, but President Trump violated the law by granting exemptions based on country or product.

They specifically noted that tariffs under this law have never been implemented since its enactment. Citing an analysis by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, which found that 90% of the costs from tariffs last year were passed on to American consumers and businesses, they criticized President Trump for doubling down on a failed economic policy by imposing yet another price increase on American consumers and companies.

Attorney General Rayfield emphasized, “Now is not the time to strengthen illegal tariffs, but to focus on returning (already collected) tariffs to the public,” adding, “With the cost of daily necessities soaring, people are already struggling to decide what to put in their shopping baskets.”

Meanwhile, this lawsuit is being led by the attorneys general of Oregon, Arizona, California, and New York—all states governed by Democratic officials. It is joined by the attorneys general from 18 other states, as well as the governors of Kentucky and Pennsylvania. Although the attorneys general of Kentucky and Pennsylvania are Republicans, their governors are Democrats. Conversely, Nevada and Vermont, where the governors are Republicans but the attorneys general are Democrats, also joined the lawsuit.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.