Trump’s Tariff Executive Orders Struck Down: Presidential “Unlimited Power” Curtailed – Can Cross-Border E-Commerce Finally Breathe?

I. The Ruling: Trump’s Tariff EOs Invalid

On August 29, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit handed down a landmark decision: several of President Trump’s tariff executive orders (EOs), issued under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), were invalidated.

The challenged orders included EOs 14193, 14194, 14195, 14257, and 14266. These directives sought to impose open-ended tariffs on imports from major trade partners such as China, Canada, and Mexico, citing rationales ranging from drug trafficking and border security to “non-reciprocal trade” and even so-called “Liberation Day” reciprocal duties.

II. What the Court Said

The Federal Circuit highlighted three key points:

1. IEEPA does not authorize the President to levy tariffs.

   • The statute empowers regulation of “importation,” but nowhere mentions “tariffs” or “duties.”

   • Taxation and tariff authority remain core powers of Congress, not the President.

2. Congress vs. Executive roles must remain distinct.

   • Where Congress intended to delegate tariff powers (e.g., Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act, the 1974 Trade Act), it did so explicitly with scope and time limits.

   • IEEPA is a national security and sanctions statute (Title 50), not a customs law (Title 19).

3. EOs cannot unilaterally amend the Harmonized Tariff Schedule.

   • Trump’s directives effectively rewrote tariff tables (HTSUS), a legislative function outside presidential authority.

III. Who Brought the Challenge?

The lawsuit was filed by five U.S. small businesses (V.O.S. Selections, Genova Pipe, MicroKits, FishUSA, Terry Precision Cycling) together with 12 states (including New York, Illinois, and Oregon).
They argued the EOs exceeded presidential authority and harmed economic interests.

The Federal Circuit sided with the plaintiffs, upholding the Court of International Trade (CIT) and blocking enforcement of the tariff orders.

IV. What This Means

1. Short-Term Effect

   • Existing tariffs are allowed to remain in place until October 14, 2025, giving the Trump administration time to appeal to the Supreme Court.

   • Trump has already announced on Truth Social that he will appeal. If the Supreme Court affirms, the government may need to refund collected tariffs.

2. Clarification of Presidential Power

   • This is more than a tariff dispute—it is a judicial reaffirmation of constitutional boundaries.

   • The ruling underscores that Congress holds the “power of the purse,” not the President.

3. Cross-Border E-Commerce Outlook

   • Sellers should not celebrate prematurely. The case could head to the Supreme Court, and uncertainty remains.

   • Even if these EOs are permanently struck down, the era of “de minimis” duty-free packages is over due to broader legislative changes.

   • Strategic takeaways: closely monitor litigation, diversify logistics, and invest in overseas warehousing to mitigate future shocks.

✅ Comment:
This case represents a critical check on presidential overreach, reinforcing the constitutional balance between Congress and the Executive. For the global e-commerce sector, it provides some breathing room—but not a return to the old “duty-free” days. Smart sellers will treat this as a signal to double down on compliance and resilience rather than wait for exemptions to return.