NJ Food Importer Sues Over Trump Tariffs on Canadian Goods

A New Jersey food importer has filed a lawsuit challenging President Donald Trump's power to use a Depression-era law to levy a 50% tariff on $20 billion worth of Canadian goods. The Gellert Global Group, a family-owned business that imports Canadian cheese, brought its case before the U.S. Court of International Trade in New York.

In August, Trump invoked Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930 to impose the tariffs on Canada. This action led to retaliatory measures from Ottawa and strained relations between the two neighboring countries. The president further escalated the dispute last month by announcing a ban on nearly $1 billion worth of Canadian products, including alcoholic beverages, dairy, and motorcycles.

The lawsuit argues that the president should not have the authority to utilize a dormant statute to impose broad tariffs or import bans without the limitations established by Congress. This is not the first time the Trump administration has faced legal challenges over its tariff policies. Earlier this year, the Supreme Court struck down tariffs imposed under a 1977 law that declared trade deficits a national emergency, forcing the administration to refund billions of dollars to importers.

Since that ruling, the Trump administration has sought alternative legal grounds for imposing tariffs. For instance, in July, numerous U.S. trading partners were subjected to tariffs ranging from 10% to 12.5% on the grounds that they had not adequately addressed imports produced by forced labor. These tariffs are also currently being contested in court.

The Gellert firm is being represented by the Liberty Justice Center, a libertarian advocacy group. The center contends that newer trade legislation passed by Congress has superseded the president's authority under Section 338, rendering it obsolete. The argument is that these newer laws, while ceding some tariff power to the president, also included specific limitations and procedural requirements, such as investigations and dealing with national security threats or foreign currency crises, which were not met in the case of the Canadian tariffs.