A U.S. federal court has struck down a series of tariffs imposed during former President Donald Trump’s administration, ruling that the executive branch exceeded its legal authority in levying the duties without proper congressional approval.

In a landmark decision issued on Tuesday, the U.S. Court of International Trade found that the tariffs, which primarily targeted steel and aluminum imports, violated statutory limits set by Congress and failed to meet the procedural requirements under the Trade Expansion Act of 1962.

“The administration did not follow the process mandated by law, nor did it demonstrate the national security threat required to justify these measures,” the court’s opinion stated.

The ruling came in response to a lawsuit filed by a coalition of U.S. businesses and trade associations that argued the tariffs had damaged supply chains and increased costs for American manufacturers.

Legal analysts say the decision could have broad implications for the scope of presidential power on trade policy, particularly regarding the use of emergency economic measures for non-traditional threats.

“This is a significant rebuke of executive overreach,” said Professor Laura Chen, a trade law expert at Georgetown University. “It reinforces the principle that trade policy must be grounded in law, not unilateral discretion.”

The Trump administration had defended the tariffs as necessary to protect American industries from foreign dumping and unfair trade practices, invoking national security as a legal basis under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act. However, the court ruled that justification insufficient and procedurally flawed.

While the ruling does not automatically remove all tariffs still in place, it sets the stage for a wave of legal and policy reversals. The Biden administration has not yet indicated whether it will appeal the decision or move to repeal the measures entirely.

In the meantime, trade groups have welcomed the verdict as a win for due process and market stability.

“This decision restores fairness and accountability to U.S. trade enforcement,” said Angela Morris, spokesperson for the American Importers Coalition.

The case is expected to influence future administrations’ approach to unilateral trade actions and may prompt renewed calls for congressional oversight in the formulation of economic policy.