A U.S. Court of International Trade panel ruled Thursday that President Donald Trump's 10% [1] global tariffs are invalid and issued a permanent injunction against them [1, 2].
The decision represents a significant legal check on executive power regarding trade policy. By invalidating the duties, the court has limited the administration's ability to unilaterally impose broad tariffs without meeting specific statutory requirements.
The ruling was delivered May 7, 2026 [3], by a three-judge panel in New York [1, 2]. The judges decided the matter in a 2-1 [1] vote, concluding that the president exceeded the authority granted under Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act [1, 4].
According to the court, the administration failed to demonstrate a balance-of-payments deficit [1, 2]. Under the 1974 Trade Act, such a deficit is a necessary prerequisite for the executive branch to exercise the power to impose these specific types of duties. Because this evidence was not provided, the court found the tariffs were unauthorized by law [1, 2].
The court's rejection of the tariffs follows a previous loss for the administration in the Supreme Court [2]. This latest ruling specifically targets the expansive view of executive power that the administration used to justify the 10% [1] global duties.
Legal representatives for the administration had argued for a broader interpretation of the president's authority to manage international trade. However, the panel said that the statutory limits of the 1974 Trade Act must be strictly upheld to prevent unauthorized executive action [1].
“The court ruled that Trump’s 10% global tariffs were invalid”
This ruling reinforces the necessity of statutory justification for trade actions, signaling that the judiciary will not allow a broad interpretation of executive power to bypass the specific requirements of the 1974 Trade Act. It creates a legal precedent that could hinder future attempts to impose global tariffs without documented economic triggers, such as a balance-of-payments deficit.
