Twenty-five US states sued President Donald Trump’s administration on 3 August 2026, asking the US Court of International Trade to block tariffs covering nearly all imports from 60 trading partners.

The states argue that the administration used concerns about forced labour as a pretext to preserve a global tariff policy that courts had already rejected under two other laws.

New York Attorney General Letitia James said “the president does not have the power to impose sweeping tariffs on whatever countries he wants”.

The complaint asks the court to set aside the tariffs, prevent federal officials from enforcing them and order refunds for duties paid by the plaintiff states.

Twenty-three states joined through their Democratic attorneys general. Kentucky and Pennsylvania joined through their Democratic governors, Andy Beshear and Josh Shapiro. No Republican state official is listed among the plaintiffs.

The Office of the US Trade Representative imposed the duties under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974. The measure applies to 59 countries and the European Union, which together are treated as 60 economies.

The tariffs, which took effect on 24 July, generally range from 10% to 12.5%, although some products are exempt and duties on certain economies are adjusted to account for existing most-favoured-nation rates.

Section 301 permits the trade representative to act against foreign government policies considered unreasonable or discriminatory and burdensome to US commerce.

The administration says the affected economies have failed to impose or effectively enforce bans on imports made with forced labour. US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said the United States had maintained and enforced such a prohibition “for nearly a century”.

The states dispute the connection between that objective and tariffs covering trading partners responsible for 99.4% of US imports. Their complaint says the administration failed to explain how broad duties on largely unrelated products would encourage stronger enforcement against forced-labour goods.

It also challenges the speed of the trade representative’s work. The office investigated 60 economies in less than three months, while previous Section 301 inquiries into individual countries lasted eight months or longer, according to the filing.

The complaint says the administration’s report cited tobacco from Malawi, rice from Myanmar and beef from Brazil as examples of goods associated with forced labour. Frozen Brazilian beef was subsequently exempted from the tariffs.

The Trade Representative’s office said its investigation included two rounds of public hearings, more than 2,100 public comments and consultations with more than 45 governments. It determined on 2 June that the policies of all 60 economies burdened or restricted US commerce and announced the final tariffs on 23 July.

The latest duties replaced temporary 10% tariffs imposed under a separate provision of the Trade Act. The Supreme Court ruled on 20 February that an emergency-powers law did not authorise Trump’s earlier tariffs, while the Court of International Trade later rejected the temporary duties imposed under Section 122. That ruling was stayed while the administration appealed.

White House spokesman Kush Desai told Reuters that the new tariffs were an appropriate and lawful response to foreign trade practices and that Section 301 had previously proved legally durable.