the news now

Twenty Five US States Sue to Block Trump's New Global Tariffs

19 sources across 14 countries · 2 of them are linked to a state

Who reported this

  • BBC News United Kingdom · Centre · Public · Licence fee, royal charter
  • Financial Times United Kingdom · Centre · Nikkei Inc.
  • Reuters United Kingdom · Centre · Thomson Reuters Corporation
  • Le Monde France · Centre-left · Fonds pour l'independance de la presse
  • France 24 France · Centre · Public · France Medias Monde (French state holding)
  • Der Spiegel Germany · Centre-left · ~50% staff-owned
  • Sueddeutsche Zeitung Germany · Centre-left · Sudwestdeutsche Medien Holding
  • Associated Press United States · Centre · Non-profit news cooperative
  • Bloomberg United States · Centre · Bloomberg L.P. (Michael Bloomberg)
  • Politico Europe Belgium · Centre · Axel Springer SE
  • Folha de S.Paulo Brazil · Centre · Grupo Folha (Frias family)
  • El Tiempo Colombia · Centre-right · Luis Carlos Sarmiento Angulo (Grupo Aval)
  • South China Morning Post Hong Kong · Centre-right · Alibaba Group
  • Tempo English Indonesia · Centre-left · PT Tempo Inti Media
  • Aftenposten Norway · Centre-right · Schibsted, Tinius Trust foundation
  • Al Jazeera Qatar · Centre-left · State-affiliated · Qatari government funded
  • The Straits Times Singapore · Centre-right · State-affiliated · SPH Media Trust; management shares under the NPPA
  • The Korea Herald South Korea · Centre-right · Herald Corporation (Yeongpoong Group)
  • El Pais Spain · Centre-left · Grupo PRISA

What the colours mean

  • Left
  • Centre-left
  • Centre
  • Centre-right
  • Right
  • A hatched block means the outlet is affiliated with, or controlled by, a state.

Political lean describes where an outlet sits within the politics of its own country. It is never a position on a single global scale.

Political lean is comparable inside one country and not across them, which is why the bar groups by country first. Publicly funded broadcasters are not marked as state-linked.

The owner of each outlet is listed as a matter of record, not as a judgement about the outlet.

A coalition of 25 US states, primarily led by Democratic governors and attorneys general, filed a lawsuit on Monday in the US Court of International Trade to block a new round of tariffs imposed by the administration of President Donald Trump. The lawsuit challenges tariffs of 10 percent and 12.5 percent levied on 60 trading partners, including the European Union, which took effect on July 24. The administration justified these duties by claiming that the affected nations failed to prevent the export of goods produced with forced labor.

The plaintiff states, including New York, California, and Oregon, argue that the administration exceeded its legal authority. They contend that the forced labor justification is a pretext to re-impose global tariffs that were previously struck down by the Supreme Court in February or had otherwise expired. The lawsuit specifically disputes the use of Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, arguing that while this law has been used by past presidents, it was intended for specific nations and industries rather than the broad application seen in this instance.

White House spokesperson Kush Desai defended the measures as a lawful response to unfair trade practices. He stated that a foreign country's failure to enforce prohibitions on forced labor burdens US commerce and American workers. This legal action follows similar lawsuits filed by small businesses on the day the tariffs went into effect. The dispute follows a period of legal volatility where the Supreme Court ruled that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act did not authorize the president to unilaterally impose such tariffs.

How each side framed it

Centre-left
These outlets emphasized the negative economic impact on working families and framed the forced labor justification as a deceptive pretext.
Centre
These outlets focused on the legal mechanics of the lawsuit and the specific statutes being contested.
Centre-right
These outlets highlighted the president's broader trade strategy and the historical context of his legal setbacks.

Sources

100% of the statements in this article were traced back to the source articles listed above.