Trump’s Alternative Legal Paths for Tariffs Now Under Scrutiny

While a federal court has blocked Donald Trump’s use of the IEEPA for tariffs, the legal battle over his protectionist ambitions may simply shift to new fronts. Trade law experts are now scrutinizing the alternative legal paths the former president might pursue if the Supreme Court upholds the recent ruling.
The court’s decision was narrow, applying only to tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. It does not affect levies under other statutes, such as Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act, which was used for steel and aluminum tariffs and is designed specifically for setting duties based on national security concerns. One potential route could be to expand the use of Section 232 to other sectors.
Other, more obscure provisions could also be revived. Legal analysts point to Section 338 of the 1930 Tariff Act, a Depression-era law allowing for retaliatory tariffs against discriminatory foreign practices. Another powerful tool is Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, which Trump has already used extensively against China to combat unfair trade practices.
Even without the IEEPA, a determined president has a formidable arsenal of trade weapons. However, each comes with its own procedural hurdles and legal challenges. The court’s ruling may force a pivot in strategy, but it is unlikely to end the broader push for using tariffs as a central tool of U.S. economic policy.