Small businesses challenging many of President Donald Trump’s global tariffs urged the U.S. Supreme Court to affirm lower court rulings that the import levies amount to a massive illegal tax on American companies.

Trump usurped the power of Congress to tax when he issued levies in February and April under an emergency law that was never intended to be used to impose duties, one of the companies, Learning Resources Inc., said in a brief Monday. The justices are set to hear arguments Nov. 5 in the high-stakes case.

“In the months since, he has raised and lowered, paused and resumed, and threatened and unthreatened tariffs at will, for a grab bag of reasons,” Learning Resources said. “By the government’s own account, those actions amount to an over $3 trillion tax increase on Americans over the next decade.”

The justices are set to determine if Trump legally issued the tariffs under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act, a law that gives the president a panoply of financial tools to address national security, foreign policy and economic emergencies. The U.S. trade court ruled against Trump in a decision that was upheld by a federal appeals court.

Trump says his tariffs are authorized legally under the law, known as IEEPA, because a key provision of the statute says the president can “regulate” the “importation” of property to address an emergency.

The justices on Sept. 9 agreed to hear the case on an unusually aggressive schedule that suggests the court will try to resolve the case quickly. The tariffs remain in place for now, even though the federal appeals court ruled that the president exceeded his authority by imposing them.

The challenged taxes include Trump’s April 2 “Liberation Day” tariffs, which impose levies of 10%-50% on most U.S. imports depending on the country they come from. Trump justified the levies under IEEPA by declaring U.S. trade deficits to be a national emergency.

The White House didn’t immediately respond to a message seeking comment.

The appeal also covers tariffs Trump imposed on Canada, Mexico and China for allegedly failing to stem the flow of migrants and fentanyl trafficking. Trump said the situation at the borders also constituted an national emergency under IEEPA.

Trump administration officials have downplayed the impact of the litigation by saying that most of the tariffs can be imposed by other legal avenues. Trump’s tariffs on steel, aluminum and automobiles were imposed under a different law, so are not directly affected by the appeal.

In a second brief filed on Monday, lawyers for a separate group of small businesses led by wine and liquor distributor V.O.S. Selections Inc. said Trump’s tariffs contradict what the nation’s founders intended when they gave Congress the power to levy taxes.

“The government contends that the president may impose tariffs on the American people whenever he wants, at any rate he wants, for any countries and products he wants, for as long as he wants — simply by declaring longstanding U.S. trade deficits a national emergency and an unusual and extraordinary threat,” the company said. “The president can even change his mind tomorrow and back again the day after that.”

A group of Democratic-led states is also challenging the tariffs.

The cases are Learning Resources v. Trump, 24-1287, and Trump v. V.O.S., 25-250, U.S. Supreme Court.

_____

(With assistance from Greg Stohr.)

_____

©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Visit bloomberg.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.