The U.S. Court of Appeals has paused the ruling against Trump's 10% global tariffs; the tariffs will continue to be imposed.

The U.S. Federal Court of Appeals on Tuesday ordered a temporary halt to a ruling declaring Trump’s global tariffs illegal, giving the Trump administration critical buffer time in the legal dispute over tariff enforcement. This means the relevant tariffs will continue to be collected, and importers must still pay as usual.

The U.S. Federal Circuit Court of Appeals issued an administrative stay and set an expedited schedule, requiring both sides to submit written comments on the U.S. government’s application—an application intended to keep the tariffs in effect during the appeal. The small businesses that filed the lawsuit and Democratic state officials must respond within one week.

The immediate effect of the stay is that importers must continue to pay a 10% tariff to the federal government under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. Earlier this month, the U.S. International Trade Court ruled that the tariff policy was invalid, which had at one point posed a serious legal challenge to the Trump administration’s authority to enforce tariffs.

According to CCTV News on May 12, local time May 11, the Trump administration requested that the U.S. court suspend enforcement of the unfavorable ruling issued earlier against the 10% global tariffs, so that the federal government can continue advancing the appeal process.

The two cases involved are Oregon v. Trump (Case No.: 26-cv-1472) and Burlap and Barrel Inc. v. Trump (Case No.: 26-cv-1606), both heard at the U.S. International Trade Court in Manhattan.

The Trump administration argued on its own interests; tariffs are temporarily preserved

Earlier this month, the U.S. International Trade Court ruled that the tariffs collected under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 are unlawful, but the practical scope of that ruling is relatively limited—it only bars the government from collecting related taxes from the two small businesses that filed the lawsuit and the state of Washington, and does not issue a comprehensive ban against all importers.

Even so, the U.S. Department of Justice firmly opposes allowing a broader judgment declaring this tariff policy unlawful to remain effective during the appeal. The Trump administration argues that if the ruling takes effect immediately, it would undermine the president’s economic agenda and disrupt ongoing foreign trade negotiations.

In its application, the U.S. Department of Justice further laid out potential knock-on risks. Government lawyers warned that if an unfavorable ruling against Section 122 tariffs took effect immediately, it would prompt thousands of importers that are still paying this tariff to rush to file lawsuits in trade courts, causing a surge in the number of cases before the courts.

At the same time, the U.S. government also pointed out that existing administrative resources are already stretched thin—another round of tariffs that the U.S. Supreme Court overturned earlier has generated a large number of refund claims that need to be handled. The U.S. government believes that, against this backdrop, stacking a new wave of litigation would severely strain resources.

Risk warning and disclaimer

        The market carries risk; investment requires caution. This article does not constitute personal investment advice, and it does not take into account any individual user’s particular investment objectives, financial situation, or needs. Users should consider whether any opinions, viewpoints, or conclusions in this article are suitable for their specific circumstances. Invest at your own risk—responsibility lies with you.