A second federal judge has ruled against President Donald Trump’s sweeping use of emergency tariffs, intensifying the legal and political battle over one of the administration’s signature economic policies.
US District Judge Rudolph Contreras of Washington, D.C., issued a preliminary injunction on Thursday blocking the government from collecting tariffs from two educational toy companies, Learning Resources Inc. and hand2mind Inc., who manufacture most of their products in Asia.
In his ruling, Contreras held that Trump lacked authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) of 1977 to impose the duties outlined in four executive orders earlier this year.
“The International Economic Emergency Powers Act does not authorize the President to impose the tariffs set forth,” Contreras wrote, adding that the statute “doesn’t encompass the power to impose the sort of sweeping levies used by Trump.”
He noted that “in the five decades since IEEPA was enacted, no President until now has ever invoked the statute…to impose tariffs.”
The decision, which aligns with a separate ruling issued Wednesday by the US Court of International Trade in New York, delivers another blow to Trump’s second-term trade agenda.
A three-judge panel from that court similarly concluded that the president’s use of IEEPA to justify broad “reciprocal tariffs” was impermissible.
“That use is impermissible not because it is unwise or ineffective, but because [IEEPA] does not allow it,” the panel wrote.
In response, the Trump administration moved quickly to contain the fallout.
The Justice Department filed an emergency motion Thursday asking the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to freeze the earlier ruling, saying the decision “upends President Trump’s efforts to eliminate our exploding trade deficit and reorient the global economy on an equal footing.”
“Absent at least interim relief from this Court,” the department added, “the United States plans to seek emergency relief from the Supreme Court tomorrow to avoid the irreparable national-security and economic harms at stake.”
Trump has relied heavily on IEEPA to justify a raft of tariffs in his second term, including duties on China, Mexico and Canada tied to fentanyl smuggling, as well as the April launch of broad reciprocal tariffs targeting nearly all US trading partners.
Legal analysts say the twin rulings significantly complicate the administration’s efforts to maintain that policy.
While Contreras limited the scope of his ruling to the two plaintiffs — who opted against seeking a nationwide injunction—he acknowledged the potential implications. Justice Department attorneys had argued that any injunction would act like a “magnet,” encouraging more businesses to sue.
To allow time for appeal, Contreras delayed the enforcement of his order for 14 days.
The appeals process will now play out in two courts: the D.C. Circuit and the Federal Circuit in Washington, both of which sit just blocks from the White House.
If appellate courts uphold the rulings, the issue could land before the Supreme Court within weeks.
“Three judges disagreed and abused their judicial power to usurp the authority of President Trump to stop him from carrying out the mandate that the American people gave him,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters during a briefing on Thursday.
“These judges failed to acknowledge that the President has core foreign affairs powers and authority given to him by Congress to protect the United States economy in national security.”
