A lawsuit filed in October 2026 challenges President Donald Trump's use of Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930 to impose 50% tariffs on Canadian goods, marking the first invocation of the 96-year-old Depression-era law [1]. Trump implemented these tariffs in July 2026 on products including hockey sticks, wine, honey, wigs, and cheeses, citing alleged trade discrimination by Ottawa [1]. The suit was filed by Gellert Global Group, a New Jersey-based food importer whose cheeses fall under the tariff scope, arguing that "Section 338 is a relic of the retaliation-based tariff policy" that has been "impliedly repealed" by subsequent legislation [1].
The complaint seeks to declare the tariffs unlawful, block their enforcement, and compel the Trump administration to issue refunds for duties already paid with interest [1]. Gellert Global is represented by the Liberty Justice Center, the same legal organization that previously secured a major victory against Trump's trade agenda when the Supreme Court struck down his "reciprocal" tariffs in February 2026 [1]. That earlier Supreme Court decision has required the administration to refund an estimated $166 billion in collected reciprocal duties to importers [1]. Liberty Justice Center CEO Sara Albrecht stated: "This case is not about the president. It is about the presidency. No president should have the power to pull a dormant statute off the shelf and use it to impose sweeping tariffs or import bans without the limits Congress required" [1]. The Liberty Justice Center is currently engaged in two additional lawsuits challenging what it characterizes as Trump's misuse of laws to impose sweeping tariffs [1]. The White House has not yet responded to requests for comment on the suit [1].
CONCLUSION
The legal challenge to Trump's Section 338 tariffs represents a significant threat to the administration's tariff strategy, particularly given the Liberty Justice Center's recent success in overturning reciprocal tariffs at the Supreme Court level. If successful, this lawsuit could result in substantial refunds to importers and further constrain the president's unilateral tariff authority, with potential implications for ongoing trade disputes with Canada and other trading partners.