Two small businesses filed a lawsuit on Friday challenging the Trump administration’s newly announced tariffs, triggering another legal dispute over the president’s authority to impose trade measures globally. The challenge came just hours after the administration imposed tariffs on imports from more than 80 countries, including key trading partners such as Canada, Mexico, and all 27 members of the European Union.

The plaintiffs, Burlap and Barrel, a New York-based spice retailer, and Collective Horology, a California watch seller, are represented by the Liberty Justice Center, a legal group that has previously mounted successful challenges against President Trump’s tariffs during his second term. Their lawsuit, filed in federal trade court, alleges that the administration overstepped its legal authority by attempting to reinstate a tariff framework that courts had declared unlawful earlier this year.

Central to the dispute is the administration’s use of Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, a provision that authorizes investigations into unfair trade practices and permits the president to impose tariffs on offending countries. While past tariff measures targeting Chinese goods under this statute survived judicial review, the plaintiffs contend that the latest round of tariffs represents an improper expansion of presidential powers.

Specifically, the administration launched investigations into allegations that numerous countries had failed to adequately enforce laws against forced labor, disadvantaging U.S. firms complying with such standards. In June, the administration identified supposed violations in 86 nations, including several U.S. allies that maintain anti-forced labor statutes. Tariffs announced on Friday range from 10 to 12.5 percent, with minimal differentiation among affected countries regardless of their labor policies.

The lawsuit argues that U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer did not thoroughly investigate each country individually, instead grouping findings and imposing tariffs en masse. The plaintiffs cite previous statements from President Trump and his aides suggesting a predetermined intent to replicate tariffs invalidated by courts, rather than basing decisions on new evidence.

“Those statements, combined with the timing and scope of the tariff action, indicate that the administration designed the tariffs to replace the invalidated regime rather than address specific unfair practices,” the filing asserts.

The Liberty Justice Center further argues that broad tariffs on diverse imports do little to remedy labor abuses and raise constitutional concerns by extending executive power without Congressional approval. “Forced labor is morally indefensible, but that does not grant the government license to disregard the law,” said Sara Albrecht, the center’s chair and CEO.

The White House did not respond to requests for comment on the lawsuit. However, President Trump described the tariffs as “standard,” noting prior use during his administration. A senior official acknowledged that while the new tariffs resemble those struck down by the Supreme Court, meaningful differences remain. The official emphasized that the president would continue employing available legal tools to pursue trade goals.

In addition to this lawsuit, an educational toy company and other small businesses also filed suit Friday challenging the tariffs. These cases are expected to proceed before the Court of International Trade, which has ruled repeatedly against the administration’s tariff authority.

States may also join the litigation. Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield said he was reviewing the latest measures and criticized the president for repeatedly imposing costs on working families.

Looking ahead, the administration anticipates further tariff actions, including potential additional duties under Section 301 targeting 15 countries and the EU over alleged unfair manufacturing practices. It also recently initiated another investigation into the EU’s penalties on U.S. tech firms.

Separately, the administration invoked a rarely used statute to impose a 50 percent tariff on billions of dollars of Canadian exports. This measure will take effect in 30 days unless legally blocked, potentially adding to the expanding trade conflicts facing the administration.