Trump’s backup plans for tariffs remain in play

[WORLD] The US Court of International Trade has ruled against Donald Trump's use of the IEEPA to impose sweeping tariffs, but the former president still has multiple legal levers at his disposal. Through lesser-known trade laws, Trump could maintain pressure on foreign partners without needing Congress. This matters because it signals how a second Trump presidency might once again reshape global trade through executive action, regardless of judicial pushback.

Key Takeaways:

• IEEPA blocked by court: The Court of International Trade ruled that Trump overstepped his authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act; the ruling is now under appeal.
• Four legal alternatives: Trump could pivot to Section 122, 232, 301, or 338 of various trade laws — each offering limited yet plausible tariff powers.
• Section 232 already in use: Recent 50% tariffs on steel and aluminum were imposed under Section 232, citing national security concerns.
• Each pathway has limits: All four options require formal investigations, time constraints, or Congressional involvement, making them slower or narrower than IEEPA.
• Potential Supreme Court showdown: If the appeals court supports Trump, the case could move to the Supreme Court, testing the boundaries of executive trade powers.

Comparative Insight

Trump’s aggressive use of executive trade powers is not without precedent. Presidents Reagan and Nixon also used tariff tools to address trade imbalances and national security risks, though typically with Congressional alignment. Trump’s strategy diverges in scope and style—deploying tariffs unilaterally and often unpredictably. Internationally, countries like China use administrative levers to control trade, but US law traditionally balances such authority through Congress. The attempted use of IEEPA for general tariffs marked a significant departure from that norm, prompting judicial intervention.

Regionally, the implications differ: allies like Canada and the EU may see renewed uncertainty if Trump revives Section 232. Asian exporters, especially China, remain vulnerable to Section 301 probes—a method Trump previously used to target over $350 billion in Chinese goods.

What’s Next

If Trump regains the White House, legal constraints won't stop his tariff agenda—they’ll simply change its form. We may see a fragmented approach: fast-trigger actions under Section 122 to signal intent, followed by strategic Section 232 probes tied to national security themes (e.g., critical minerals, semiconductors). While less sweeping than IEEPA, these tactics could still provoke retaliation or complicate trade negotiations. Businesses dependent on imports should prepare for a volatile regulatory environment, especially in manufacturing, tech, and energy sectors.

What It Means

Trump's fallback options reflect a broader shift toward executive-led trade policy—a trend that bypasses traditional diplomacy in favor of unilateral leverage. While judicial and legislative checks may slow the process, they may not deter a determined administration. For investors, supply chain strategists, and foreign governments, the message is clear: legal rulings won't neutralize the risk of tariff escalation. In fact, Trump's pursuit of alternative paths could institutionalize a more fragmented and confrontational US trade strategy, reshaping global expectations around stability and access to the American market.