New Lawsuit Challenges Trump Administration’s Section 301 Forced Labor Tariffs

The latest chapter in the ongoing legal battle over U.S. tariffs has begun.

On July 24, 2026, two U.S. importers filed suit in the U.S. Court of International Trade challenging the Trump Administration’s recently imposed Section 301 tariffs targeting imports from more than 60 trading partners. The plaintiffs seek to invalidate the tariffs and obtain refunds of duties paid.

Background

The challenged tariffs stem from a Section 301 investigation conducted by the Office of the United States Trade Representative (“USTR”) into foreign governments’ efforts to prevent the importation and use of forced labor goods.

Following the investigation, USTR imposed additional duties—generally ranging from 10% to 12.5%—on imports from numerous countries. The tariffs took effect on July 24, 2026.

These measures arrived shortly after the expiration of the Administration’s temporary Section 122 tariffs, which had themselves followed the invalidation of the Administration’s earlier IEEPA tariff program. The plaintiffs argue that the new Section 301 tariffs effectively recreate the duty structure previously imposed under those earlier authorities.

The Plaintiffs’ Claims

The complaint raises several significant challenges to the legality of the Section 301 action, including:

• Arbitrary and capricious decision-making. The plaintiffs contend that the tariff rates were predetermined and that the investigation merely attempted to justify a decision that had already been made.
• Failure to comply with Section 301. According to the complaint, USTR did not satisfy the statutory requirements necessary to impose Section 301 remedies.
• Insufficient country-specific analysis. The lawsuit argues that Section 301 requires individualized findings regarding each foreign country’s acts, policies, or practices and their effect on U.S. commerce. The plaintiffs allege that USTR instead relied on broad, generalized findings regarding forced labor without adequately analyzing each country’s circumstances.
• An unusually abbreviated investigation. The complaint also points to the relatively short timeline of the investigation, contrasting it with prior Section 301 investigations—such as the first Trump Administration’s investigation into China’s technology transfer and intellectual property practices—which took substantially longer to complete.

Taken together, the plaintiffs argue that the resulting tariffs violate the Administrative Procedure Act and exceed USTR’s authority under Section 301.

Why This Matters

Although the litigation is in its early stages, the case could have significant implications for importers.

If the plaintiffs ultimately prevail, importers that have paid these Section 301 duties may have opportunities to seek refunds, subject to the Court’s eventual ruling and any applicable procedural requirements. Conversely, if the government successfully defends the action, the tariffs are likely to remain in place.

The case also continues a broader trend of judicial scrutiny over recent tariff actions. The Administration previously defended challenges to its IEEPA tariffs and Section 122 tariffs before the Court of International Trade, with portions of those disputes still working their way through the appellate process.

Looking Ahead

The government’s response to the complaint will likely provide the first detailed defense of the Section 301 investigation and the rationale supporting the new tariff program. Among the key issues the Court may ultimately consider are:

• Whether USTR complied with the procedural and substantive requirements of Section 301;
• Whether the investigation adequately supported the country-specific tariff determinations;
• Whether the administrative record demonstrates reasoned decision-making; and
• Whether the chosen tariff rates are supported by the findings of the investigation.

As this litigation progresses, importers affected by the new Section 301 tariffs should closely monitor developments. Businesses paying these duties may wish to evaluate their options and preserve any rights that could become important depending on the outcome of the case.

Our International Trade team will continue to monitor this litigation and provide updates as significant developments occur. If your business is affected by these new Section 301 tariffs or you have questions regarding potential refund opportunities or compliance obligations, please contact us to discuss your specific circumstances.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information discussed herein reflects publicly available information and the status of legal proceedings as of the date of publication. Because litigation and trade regulations are subject to change, readers should not act or refrain from acting based on this article without first seeking legal advice regarding their specific circumstances. Reading this article does not create an attorney-client relationship with our firm. If you have questions regarding the application of U.S. customs laws, tariffs, or international trade regulations to your business, please contact one of our attorneys.