• Twenty-four U.S. states are suing President Trump over new global tariffs.
• The lawsuit argues that the tariffs violate the Constitution's separation of powers.
• The tariffs in question were imposed after a Supreme Court ruling invalidated previous tariffs.
• The states seek to stop the tariffs and request refunds for payments already made.
• Legal experts suggest courts may defer more to the administration regarding the new tariff authority.

A coalition of 24 U.S. states filed a lawsuit against President Trump on Thursday, contesting the legality of the newly imposed 10% global tariffs. This legal challenge arrives immediately after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down most of Trump's prior tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), claiming the president overstepped his executive authority regarding tariff imposition, which constitutionally belongs to Congress. The federal court ruling highlighted that the president could not unilaterally enact such measures outside of legislated authority, according to Los Angeles Times and BBC.

The lawsuit, led by the Democratic attorneys general from states including New York, California, and Oregon, argues that Trump’s new tariffs, introduced under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, are not intended for addressing routine trade imbalances. The states contend that Section 122 was designed for rare circumstances involving immediate monetary emergencies, not typical trade deficits. Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield emphasized, "The focus right now should be on paying people back, not doubling down on illegal tariffs," according to Al Jazeera and South China Morning Post.

The states are not only seeking to block the introduction of the new tariffs but are also requesting refunds for any payments made under previous tariff frameworks. They argue that the Trump administration's tariff policies have led to substantial financial burdens on American households and businesses, claiming that these levies could cost families approximately $1,200 annually. Critics, including Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes, have stated that these financial burdens are detrimental to families trying to afford essential needs like groceries and housing, as noted by Reuters and CBS News.

The White House maintains that Trump is acting within his legal authority to address what it describes as significant international payment challenges. A spokesperson for the administration stated, "The president is using his authority granted by Congress to address fundamental international payments problems and to deal with our country’s large and serious balance-of-payments deficits," reflecting the administration's determined stance to defend the tariffs in court. This comes as the court has already ordered U.S. Customs to start processing refunds for past tariff payments that were invalidated by the Supreme Court, according to India Times and Los Angeles Times.