Small Businesses File New Lawsuits Against Trump Tariffs

Small businesses that previously challenged President Donald Trump’s trade policies are now suing to block his latest round of tariffs. The lawsuits come as courts have already rejected some of the president's earlier tariff regimes and cast doubt on others.

One lawsuit was filed by Burlap & Barrel, a spice company, and watch retailer Collective Horology, both of which previously challenged temporary Section 122 tariffs imposed under Trump’s administration. Another suit was brought by toymaker Learning Resources, along with a flooring manufacturer and affiliated firms, following their victory in a Supreme Court case that overturned another set of Trump's tariffs.

The new lawsuits target the latest round of tariffs imposed under Section 301 of the Trade Act, which took effect last week as White House temporary Section 122 levies expired. These tariffs generally impose rates of 10% or 12.5% on imports from over 60 economies that the administration claims failed to adequately block goods produced with forced labor.

The Liberty Justice Center, representing Burlap & Barrel and Collective Horology, argues that the administration has stretched Congress's intention for a targeted trade remedy into a sweeping global tariff regime. The firm alleges that U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer determined tariff rates first before assembling findings to justify them afterward.

Learning Resources' complaint claims that Trump officials relied on generalized findings rather than demonstrating how each country’s practices burdened U.S. commerce, as required by law. "The third time's not the charm," the complaint states, reflecting frustration with repeated legal defeats for similar tariff measures.

Collective Horology co-founder Asher Rapkin told Axios that previous tariffs cost his company over $160,000, with refunds from invalidated tariffs still pending. He warned that Section 301 tariffs would similarly hamper his business, noting the lack of U.S. manufacturing alternatives for Swiss watches.

Courts have previously rejected Trump’s first attempt to impose sweeping tariffs under emergency powers and are currently reviewing a separate challenge against temporary replacement tariffs under Section 122. The current legal battle now focuses on how officials exercise their trade power rather than whether they possess tariff authority.

The White House maintains that the tariffs lawfully target foreign failures to block forced labor imports. "Section 301 tariffs have proven to be a legally durable tool since the President's first term, and they remain so now," stated White House spokesman Kush Desai in response to the lawsuits.

Small businesses have played a significant role in challenging Trump’s tariff policies, repeatedly forcing the administration into court as it shifts from one legal authority to another. This ongoing litigation underscores the contentious nature of Trump’s trade agenda and its impact on import-dependent companies.