New York University's Litigation Tracker website serves as a comprehensive resource detailing the legal challenges against the Trump administration. Launched by the university's law school on January 29, the tracker has been updated regularly and currently lists nearly 100 cases where citizens and institutions have initiated legal action against decisions made by the former US president. These cases predominantly focus on the numerous executive orders issued by Donald Trump since he took office, addressing issues such as the dissolution of key agencies like USAID, the termination of state employees, and the suspension of government payments.
Interestingly, the tracker does not include any of Trump's controversial trade actions against both allies and adversaries. The absence of these trade disputes can be attributed to the fact that they fall under international law and are typically managed by the World Trade Organization (WTO), headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland. Jürgen Matthes from the Institute for the German Economy (IW) in Cologne explains that the legal landscape surrounding Trump's trade actions is complex. He highlights that Trump's tariffs are in violation of existing trade laws, and the additional measures proposed against countries like China and the EU further exacerbate this issue.
China swiftly reacted to the Trump administration's imposition of an additional 10% tariff on its goods by filing a complaint with the WTO. However, Matthes notes that these legal challenges have not been productive thus far, even though they are critical for maintaining the integrity of the international trade system. He suggests that it is likely the WTO arbitration panel would deem US tariffs unlawful; however, the Trump administration would likely appeal any unfavorable ruling to the WTO's Appellate Body, which has been non-operational for several years. This deadlock arose after the Trump administration blocked the appointment of judges to the appellate body in 2019, a situation that the Biden administration has also not addressed due to its call for reforms within the WTO.
Canada and Mexico view Trump's tariffs as a significant breach of international law. Both countries are not only WTO members but also partners in the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), a free trade agreement ratified by the US Congress. Kathleen Claussen, a law professor at Georgetown University, points out that while it is widely accepted that tariffs cannot be imposed on free trade partners or WTO members, the US government may find a legal loophole to justify its actions. This situation could lead to challenges in US courts, where the tariffs could be contested not only for violating WTO rules but also for breaching the USMCA.
Claussen argues that Donald Trump employs tariffs as a strategic tool in trade negotiations rather than out of a genuine interest in the tariffs themselves. She compares this tactic to mobile phone providers offering discounts—beneficial for negotiation but based on the relationship between the parties involved. The unpredictable nature of Trump's tariff threats has already been experienced by Canada and Mexico, who faced sudden punitive tariffs only to have them postponed and then reinstated shortly after.
As tensions rise, European nations, particularly Germany, are contemplating their options in response to potential US tariffs. The European Commission has hinted at forthcoming countermeasures, though specific details remain undisclosed. Matthes expresses hope that a resolution will be reached before any trade war escalates, potentially through increased European purchases of US goods or military equipment. He emphasizes that while a trade war is detrimental to all parties involved, it is crucial not to capitulate to every demand made by the Trump administration.
This article, originally written in German, highlights the intricate legal and diplomatic challenges facing the international community in the wake of Trump's trade policies.
