Twelve states sue Trump over tariffs

President Donald Trump’s tariff faces a major legal challenge from New York and 11 other states, which argues that the president has overcome his authority and put the American economy at risk by imposing it without the approval of congress.

The lawsuit was filed in the American International Trade Court, and it challenges Trump’s use of emergency authorities under the IEEPA Economic Forces law (IEPA) to impose a wide tariff on imports from countries around the world.

“Once again, Democrats, like Leitia James, give priority to chasing the witch against President Trump for protecting the safety and welfare of their voters,” White House spokesman Kush Disai wrote exclusively to Fox News Digital. “The Trump administration remains committed to using its full legal authority to counter the distinguished national emergencies that our country is currently facing – both of which are the lesion of illegal immigration, fentanel flows across our borders and the deficit in the annual American goods trade.”

However, the 12 countries argue that the constitution grants Congress, not the president, the authority to impose taxes and definitions, and that IEPA was not intended to allow commercial policy to this scope.

Trump’s enemy has long been Leitia James, a possible internal trading review on the standing of the president’s tariff

“President Trump’s reckless tariff for consumers has increased and economic chaos throughout the country,” said state governor Cathy Hochol. “New York stands to fight against the biggest increase in federal taxes in American history. Public Prosecutor James begins this litigation on behalf of the New York consumers, because we cannot allow President Trump to push our country to stagnate.”

“The president does not have the power to raise taxes,” said New York Prosecutor Littia James. “Its definition is illegal, and if it does not stop, it will lead to more inflation, unemployment and economic damage.”

Since February 2025, Trump has signed multiple executive orders that impose a new tariff on Canada, Mexico, China and almost all American commercial partners.

The administration cited national emergency situations as a basis for definitions, including drug trafficking, illegal immigration, and unfair commercial practices. Countries in the lawsuit claim that the President’s justifications are vague and not adequately sufficient.

IEPA, which was enact in 1977, allows the presidents to respond to specific international threats, such as terrorism or hostile foreign actors. But according to the lawsuit, no president has been used in 48 years since his approval to impose definitions.

The legislator links the Republican Party of Trump’s success story 19 million dollars in its region: “A new model for American manufacturing”

The complaint argues that the new definitions were imposed without the approval of Congress or the necessary legal results to justify comprehensive commercial procedures.

The lawsuit also claims that the definitions are not related to any specific “unusual and unusual” threat, as required by IEPA, which the Trump administration mentioned as its authority. The states claim that the customs tariff will significantly raise the prices of consumers, pay inflation, lead to job losses, and create economic instability on a large scale.

President Donald Trump speaks during an event to announce a new tariff in the Roses Park at the White House, on Wednesday, April 2, 2025, in Washington, with Trade Minister Howard Lottenic listened. (AP Photo/Mark Schiesfelbein)

The legal challenge is not only focused on the economy. He argues that definitions are unconstitutional because they rape the authority of Congress on taxes and trade. The lawsuit also claims that the policy of change management – which they claim is often modified through executive requests or social media – has created chaos in commercial and financial markets.

Trump administration supporters say the definitions are a bold step to protect American industries and correct long commercial imbalances.

At a press conference in February 2025, President Trump said, “We took hundreds of billions of dollars [with past tariffs]… will make our country rich, “as measures are frame as a continuation of its first economic business table in America.

But the lawsuit draws a different image of legal transgression and a lack of transparency. He argues that if President Trump’s actions are allowed to stand, any future president can impose taxes under the emergency authority poster, completely transcending Congress.

President Donald Trump speaks during a commercial declaration event, “Make the wealthy America again” in the White House garden on April 2, 2025, in Washington, DC. (Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

The governor of the state, Hochol and Prosecutor James, both of whom are critical critics of the Trump administration, have clashed with the president on a set of issues, from immigration to environmental policy. This last lawsuit represents another prominent confrontation.

Click here to get the Fox News app

Besides New York, the General Lawyers in Arizona, Colorado, Contecticut, Dillauir, Ilinoi, Main, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, Origon and Vermont are on the case.

The coalition is asking the court to prevent further enforcement of definitions and declaring invalid orders under the constitution and federal law.