+34
The US Court of International Trade heard arguments challenging the Trump administration's new tariffs on approximately 86 countries, imposed under forced labor provisions. This legal battle follows previous rulings by the Court and the Supreme Court that struck down earlier tariff initiatives as unlawful, with critics arguing the new measures are a transparent attempt to resurrect the rejected regime.
Donald Trump’s third attempt to impose a global tariffs regime is being tested by the same panel of judges that deemed his previous attempts illegal.
On Wednesday, the US Court of International Trade, which struck down those earlier tariffs, heard arguments in a challenge brought by importers and 25 Democrat-led states to the 10 to 12.5 per cent tariffs the Trump administration imposed on about 60 economies and 86 countries in late July. The administration’s cause hasn’t been helped by public comments by Trump and other administration officials, that have made it clear that the use of the forced labour provisions of the act is a device to resurrect the tariff regime the Supreme Court decision had demolished.
The tariffs were imposed, ostensibly, because of those countries’ failure to adequately prevent imports of goods made with forced labour. The administration argues that those failures gave them an unfair advantage over US producers and “burdens or restricts” US commerce.
The “forced labour” tariffs are a transparent attempt to recreate the global tariff regime that the Court of International Trade ruled illegal last May; a judgment that the US Supreme Court confirmed in February. The administration responded to the Supreme Court setback by with a temporary replacement for the illegal tariffs, using a different section of the US Trade Act, which allows a president to impose tariffs of up to 15 per cent for a maximum of 150 days in a balance of payments crisis.
The US doesn’t have – with a floating exchange rate it can’t have – a balance of payments crisis, and so those tariffs, too, were ruled unlawful by the trade court. The administration has appealed that decision but, in any event, those tariffs have expired and been replaced by those now being scrutinised by the court.
The section of the Trade Act – Section 301 – that the administration is relying on for the forced labour tariffs has been tested in the courts previously and held up. If Trump’s tariffs were knocked out it would be a good thing for US companies and consumers, who effectively pay them, and for the US inflation rate.
Its provisions require detailed country-specific, investigations, consultations with the targeted country or countries, hearings and evidence of the country’s failings and the harm it has caused to US businesses. The administration’s cause hasn’t been helped by public comments by Trump and other administration officials, that have made it clear that the use of the forced labour provisions of the act is a device to resurrect the tariff regime the Supreme Court decision had demolished.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent had declared after that decision that the rates would go back to exactly where they had been before that judgment, which is what the forced labour tariffs would do. Trump himself told Fox News that the new tariffs were “doing the same thing” as the ones ruled out by the Supreme Court.
Those and other officials’ comments were cited by those challenging the tariffs, who have argued that the expressed concerns about forced labour are just a pretext for recreating what the courts have already deemed illegal. They have also argued, more substantively, that the administration has failed to satisfy the legal requirements for implementing the tariffs, saying that in its haste to replace the interim tariffs it had not adequately followed the country-specific processes and made the country-specific analysis and findings required by the law.
“If you’re going to do it at breakneck speed and try to cover the entire globe, you still have to satisfy the statutory requirements,” a lawyer for the challengers argued. The administration’s lawyer said the US Trade Representative had thoroughly evaluated the prevalence of goods made with forced labour in international commerce and didn’t need to show “with metaphysical certainty” that forced labour was a burden on US commerce before imposing the tariffs.
Manufacturing investment and jobs have shrunk ever since Trump regain office, after peaking in 2024, when Joe Biden was president. He was questioned by the judges on how forced labour had created unfair competition for US companies, and whether the administration’s report had demonstrated that harm had been done. He claimed it had produced ample evidence. The government, he also said, had wide discretion to decide the sorts of foreign practices that would allow Section 301 tariffs to be imposed.
The judges could, as they did with Trump’s earlier attempts, simply deem the latest tariffs illegal. They also a raised the possibility that they could hand the whole matter back to the US Trade Representative’s office, with directions to redo the entire process properly. For Trump, a third courtroom loss would be a blow. He’s already had to disgorge most of the $US166 billion of revenue raised by his initial “Liberation Day” tariffs.
Depending on the outcome of the administration’s appeal, it might also have to refund tens of billions of dollars raised by the interim tariffs. It would also undermine the leverage he has had in using tariffs and the threat of tariffs to coerce and punish other countries. While there are other mechanisms for imposing tariffs, which he has used, there is no apparent fourth option to create a global tariff regime.
Mind you, if Trump’s tariffs were knocked out it would be a good thing for US companies and consumers, who effectively pay them, and for the US inflation rate. It might also, counterintuitively, be good for the US manufacturing sector Trump used as justification for his tariffs. There might be a boom in data centre construction, but manufacturing has been faltering despite – or perhaps because of – Trump’s tariffs.
Manufacturing investment and jobs have shrunk ever since Trump regain office, after peaking in 2024, when Joe Biden was president. That may be because of the volatile economic environment Trump’s policies have created, but it might also be because the range of tariffs he has had in place throughout the term have raised the costs of the imported intermediate productions feeding into the manufacturing sector.
Trump’s tariffs have also failed to have any material impact on the US goods trade deficit and, even at their peak, raised only a fraction of the revenue he claimed would enable him to eradicate America’s $US2 trillion a year budget deficit, or abolish income taxes, or fund $US5000 cheques to Americans that would cost more than $US1 trillion. Tariffs, as it has been demonstrated, aren’t the magic pudding Trump thought – and still thinks – they are.
US Court Of International Trade Donald Trump Global Tariffs Forced Labor Provisions US Trade Act
Australia Latest News, Australia Headlines
Similar News: You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Cricket 2026: Australia vs South Africa third ODI, Nathan Ellis injury, Jack Edwards hamstring, team newsTriple injury blow rocks Aussies as five-wicket hero under cloud for ODI finale
Read more »
Teen volleyball player identified as third victim in horror crashFamily and friends have paid tribute to 14-year-old Tenesha Fieldsend who was one of three killed in the shocking smash.
Read more »
Brisbane Lions Celebrate Third Consecutive Premiership Amid Future Coaching DiscussionsThe Brisbane Lions wrapped up a triumphant 2026 season with a celebratory ceremony at Riverstage, complete with the city's mayor handing the coach the keys to the city. While Chris Fagan refrains from confirming whether he will stay on for the 2027 season, club leadership notes that the decision will be made after the year's final game and will depend on the team's desire to continue the pattern of excellence. The event also showcased the club's succession plans, highlighted by Danny Daly, the Head of Football, and other potential internal candidates. Fans and players alike provided a rousing celebration, forever cementing the program's place in the AFL's storied history.
Read more »
Lawmakers Urge Congress to Protect Immigrants From Third-Country Deportations After Supreme Court RulingDemocratic lawmakers are calling for Congress to strengthen protections after the Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to resume deporting immigrants to countries where they may face danger, persecution or torture. The ruling did not address the legality of these deportations on the merits, and a hearing is scheduled for December. The administration says third-country removals are necessary when immigrants' home countries refuse to accept them.
Read more »