A federal judge has dismissed an emergency lawsuit attempting to block President Donald Trump’s tariff policies from taking effect.
U.S. District Judge T. Kent Wetherell II denied an urgent request by a Florida-based stationary company to pause their legal challenge against the tariffs. He redirected the case to the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT), explaining that it “makes no sense for this case to remain in this court because the CIT is already considering multiple nearly identical suits.”
Wetherell also stated that under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), Trump has the legal authority to impose wide-ranging tariffs for purposes beyond revenue generation, as reported by Fox Business.
The ruling is the first to endorse Trump’s interpretation of the IEEPA as allowing the unilateral application of tariffs for non-revenue-related reasons. It is also a procedural win for the Trump Administration, which has preferred the CIT as the venue for such cases.
Opponents have argued in various lawsuits that Trump misused the IEEPA to roll out his expansive “Liberation Day” tariff plan.
Wetherell disagreed, concluding that Trump possessed the legal power to enforce the tariffs. He noted that the issue “was effectively answered 50 years ago” through legal precedent set in United States v. Yoshida International Inc., a case initiated by a Japanese zipper company during the Nixon era.
The judge determined that Trump’s stated objectives—pressuring China and nearby nations to curb the fentanyl trade and addressing trade imbalances—meet the IEEPA’s criteria.
“Likewise, the stated purpose of the tariffs at issue in this case is to help stem the flow of illicit drugs into the United States and to remedy an ongoing trade imbalance, not to raise revenue,” Judge Wetherell said.
The matter will now proceed in the U.S. Court of International Trade, where the outcome remains uncertain, though past rulings have generally favored the Trump Administration.
Earlier in the year, a three-judge panel turned down a petition from a coalition of small businesses seeking to immediately block the tariffs, concluding that the plaintiffs did not prove they would face “immediate and irreparable harm” from the economic measures.
