How do the new Trump tariffs differ from what the Supreme Court struck down?

WASHINGTON —

The Trump administration imposed new tariffs on 60 U.S. trade partners Friday, including major allies like Japan and the European Union (EU), replacing temporary import taxes that expired earlier overnight.

The previous tariffs had been in effect since February, when the Supreme Court struck down President Donald Trump’s broad, “Liberation Day” tariffs.

The administration says the new tariffs, ranging from 10% to 12.5%, fall under Section 301 of the U.S. Trade Act of 1974, which allows action against countries with a “persistent pattern of conduct that permits any form of forced or compulsory labor.”

The administration says a four-month investigation identified the countries, arguing the targeted countries had not adequately enforced bans on goods produced by forced labor.

“President Trump recognizes that decades of moral suasion have not eradicated forced labor from global supply chains. The United States has had a forced labor import ban for nearly a century, and rigorously enforces it; it’s well past time for our trading partners to do the same,” U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said in a statement. “(Friday’s) action will begin to correct what is both a human rights abuse and distortive trade practice to improve the welfare of workers everywhere.”

Greer expanded on the administration’s philosophy during a hearing on Capitol Hill this week.

“The specific authorities this administration is using have changed, but the trade strategy has not,” Greer said when testifying before lawmakers. “We are committed to continuing to use tariffs and to negotiate deals to support the reindustrialization of our economy, protect American workers and increase their wages, and shrink our trade deficit.”

But critics argue the forced labor justification is merely “legal cover” for advancing Trump’s trade agenda, though some experts suggest the administration’s procedural approach makes the tariffs less likely to be overturned in court.

“The question is, is the administration’s findings appropriate? And that, I think, a court is much less likely to wade into that,” CATO Director of Economics Scott Lincicome said. “The court is open to saying, ‘Well, the law does X, Y and Z. ‘ The court is less likely to say, ‘We don’t agree with forced labor being a problem. We don’t agree that you conducted a proper analysis.’ Courts don’t like to do that, so I think it’s less likely that a court will want to actually second-guess the administration here.”

Despite the new tariffs, Lincicome says consumers may not notice significant price changes since the new taxes replace expired ones at similar rates.

Later on Friday, Trump also announced an investigation into the European Union’s trade practices, accusing the bloc of targeting major American companies like Google, Amazon, and Apple.

“The United States of America is not a “PIGGYBANK” for Europe, nor will we allow it to be!” the post read in part. “The European Union will pay a very big price for this illegal and highly unethical conduct, which I have consistently warned them about. The penalties will be entirely reversed and, we anticipate, a substantial TARIFF to be placed on them at the earliest possible moment.”

Additional investigations are also underway into about a dozen other countries for “excess capacity,” a practice where overproduction of goods like cars and steel floods the global market, harming U.S. competitiveness, according to Lincicome.

Watch more on the Trump administration’s new tariffs on forced labor: