Cargo being unloaded at the Port of Baltimore. A three-judge federal panel issued late May 28 a permanent and nationwide injunction on tariffs imposed against China, Canada and Mexico related to fentanyl trafficking and the across-the-board 10% reciprocal tariffs on all trading partners. (Courtesy U.S. Department of Agriculture)

The U.S. Court of International Trade struck down President Trump’s tariffs, a ruling cabinet officials warned will have catastrophic consequences to negotiations with foreign countries.

The three-judge panel issued late May 28 a permanent and nationwide injunction on tariffs imposed against China, Canada and Mexico related to fentanyl trafficking and the across-the-board 10% reciprocal tariffs on all trading partners. The court gave the Trump administration 10 days to lift the tariffs.

The Justice Department immediately filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and filed another motion May 29 asking the trade court to stay their ruling until the appeals court, and possibly the Supreme Court, reviewed the decision.

The trade court gave states and private businesses challenging the tariffs until noon May 30 to respond to the Justice Department’s motion to stay the ruling.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said the three judges “brazenly abused their judicial powers.”

“America cannot function if President Trump or any president for that matter has their sensitive diplomatic or trade negotiations railroaded by activist judges,” she said.

The New York-based trade court issued one ruling addressing two lawsuits, one filed by small businesses and the other filed by a 12-state coalition led by Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield.

Judges Gary Katzmann, an Obama appointee, Timothy Reif, a Trump appointee, and Jane Restani, a Reagan appointee, seemed to anticipate political criticism of their ruling.

In an opinion signed by all three, the judges said they weren’t passing judgment on whether the tariffs are good diplomatic strategy — just their legality.

The Constitution grants Congress the power to levy tariffs. At issue is how much authority Congress delegated to the president in the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977.

The act authorizes the president to regulate imports during a national emergency. The court ruled Trump has exercised that authority without any identifiable limits.

Even if Congress intended to give the president complete power to levy unlimited tariffs, it can’t — it would be an unconstitutional delegation of powers, according to the court.

The court also said the fentanyl-related tariffs against China, Canada and Mexico were illegal because there was no direct connection between drug trafficking and the tariffs. Congress didn’t intend for tariffs to be used as “leverage” in negotiations, according to the court.

The trade court said its only option was to strike down Trump’s retaliatory and reciprocal tariffs across-the-board because the Constitution requires import duties to be uniform. The decision affects tariffs the U.S. included in recent trade agreements with the United Kingdom and China.

The Trump administration mounted an extraordinary campaign to sway the trade court by filing declarations May 23 from Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and Trade Representative Jamieson Greer.

The cabinet officials said overturning the tariffs would upset trade negotiations, weaken the president and invite other countries to levy retaliatory tariffs.

Lutnick declared the tariffs a success. “Foreign-trading partners that have run trade deficits in goods for years, and helped hollow out the American manufacturing base, immediately came to the negotiating table,” he wrote.