What VOS v. Trump Means for American Businesses
We are fighting to ensure that the Constitution’s checks and balances are honored, that businesses have certainty, and that liberty—not executive power—sets the terms of trade in America.
What is this case about?
The Trump administration imposed sweeping new tariffs without congressional approval, claiming emergency powers. We argue that this is unlawful and unconstitutional.
Who are the plaintiffs?
Our clients are U.S. businesses that import goods from more than 27 countries. They face higher costs, disrupted operations, and difficult choices—raising prices, cutting jobs, or cancelling orders.
What have the courts said?
On On August 29, 2025, the Liberty Justice Center celebrated a second major court win in VOS v. Trump when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled the tariffs illegal. Below is a summary of the majority opinion and the dissent.
| Issue | Majority Opinion (Per Curiam) | Dissent (Taranto, joined by Moore, Prost, Chen) |
| Text of IEEPA | IEEPA does not authorize tariffs. The statute allows regulation (like embargoes or restrictions), but tariffs are taxes, and Congress never mentioned tariffs in the statute. | IEEPA’s power to “regulate imports” is broad enough to include tariffs. Historically, tariffs are one of the most common forms of regulation of foreign trade. |
Limits on Presidential Power | President’s interpretation would create unlimited, unreviewable authority to impose tariffs at will—contrary to the Constitution’s separation of powers. | IEEPA already contains meaningful limits: requires a finding of an “unusual and extraordinary threat” with a foreign source. That provides an intelligible principle satisfying the nondelegation doctrine. |
| Historical Practice | No President before Trump ever used IEEPA to impose tariffs. Congress created other statutes (like Section 122) to deal with trade deficits, which shows IEEPA was not meant for tariffs. | Since 1977, Presidents have used IEEPA for sweeping restrictions on imports, exports, and financial transactions. The dissent argues this long practice supports a broad reading that includes tariffs. |
| Foreign Affairs Deference | Courts still have a duty to check the President—foreign affairs do not give a blank check. Tariffs are too economically significant to be left to unilateral executive discretion. | In foreign affairs, courts owe exceptional deference to presidential judgment. Tariffs here were tied to foreign threats (drugs, migration, hostile governments) and should be upheld. |
Major Questions Doctrine | Even if IEEPA were ambiguous, under the Major Questions Doctrine, Congress must clearly authorize the President to impose tariffs. It did not. | The dissent downplays the major questions argument, stressing that Congress intended to give the President flexible tools in emergencies—including tariffs. |
Policy Application | Tariffs were imposed without legal basis, destabilizing the economy, and harming businesses and consumers. | Tariffs were targeted bargaining tools to induce Canada, Mexico, and China to act against drugs, migration, and unfair practices. They fit IEEPA’s purpose. |
Bottom Line | Unlawful – President cannot impose tariffs under IEEPA. Protects separation of powers and prevents executive overreach. | Lawful – Tariffs are within IEEPA’s grant of power. Courts should defer to the President’s foreign-affairs judgment. |
Where is the case now?
The case began in the U.S. Court of International Trade, which ruled the tariffs illegal. The administration appealed, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit also ruled the tariffs illegal. A U.S. Supreme Court review is likely.
Why should business owners care?
Tariffs act as hidden taxes on businesses and consumers. They hurt competitiveness, raise prices, and create instability in supply chains. If allowed, any president could use emergency powers to impose tariffs—or other economic rules—without oversight.
What happens if you win?
If successful, the tariffs will be struck down, and businesses could be eligible for refunds. More importantly, we will secure a precedent protecting Congress’s trade and tax authority from presidential overreach.
How can I help?
The Liberty Justice Center relies on supporters to defend constitutional freedoms in court. Join us today to stand with businesses, consumers, and the Constitution.