A multistate coalition spearheaded by New York Attorney General Letitia James has initiated legal action against former President Donald Trump’s administration over controversial tariffs targeting Caribbean nations and other countries. The lawsuit, joined by 21 attorneys general alongside the governors of Kentucky and Pennsylvania, contends that these sweeping trade measures exceed presidential authority and violate constitutional principles.
The legal challenge emerges shortly after the US Supreme Court ruled against Trump’s previous tariff imposition under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). In response to that defeat, the former president invoked Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 to enact new tariffs affecting Caribbean economies.
The coalition’s central argument maintains that the presidential administration lacks legal standing to implement such comprehensive tariffs under this legislation. They assert that the measures fail to meet Section 122’s specific requirements while simultaneously infringing upon constitutional separation of powers protections.
Attorney General James characterized the move as another example of Trump disregarding legal boundaries to effectively tax consumers and small businesses. ‘These tariffs will only drive up the cost of living,’ James stated in comments to Caribbean Media Corporation, ‘and I will continue to uphold the rule of law to protect New Yorkers.’
New York Governor Kathy Hochul supported the legal action, noting that ‘illegal and reckless tariff policies continue to weigh on businesses, farmers and consumers across New York State.’ Hochul emphasized the state’s pursuit of recovering $13.5 billion in tariff costs from federal collections.
The legal filing highlights that no previous administration has attempted to utilize Section 122 for broad tariff implementation. The statute was specifically designed to address monetary crises within fixed-rate exchange systems like the gold standard—a financial framework abandoned by the United States fifty years ago.
Furthermore, the coalition challenges the administration’s justification based on trade deficits, arguing that such economic conditions are conceptually distinct from the balance of payments deficits that Section 122 was intended to address. The lawsuit also notes discriminatory application, as the tariffs exempt numerous goods from Canada, Mexico, and several Central American nations while including 84 pages of specific product exceptions.
The legal action seeks judicial intervention from the United States Court of International Trade to declare the tariffs unlawful, prevent their implementation, and secure refunds for states that have already incurred costs under the proclamation.