Trump’s Brazil Tariff Threat Fuels Legal Fight Over His Trade Powers

Trump’s Brazil Tariff Threat Fuels Legal Fight Over His Trade Powers

President Donald Trump’s recent threat to slap Brazil with a 50 percent tariff is drawing heavy criticism and may bolster a major legal challenge to his sweeping trade policies. Trump’s decision was tied to political tensions with Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva over the prosecution of former President Jair Bolsonaro, a close Trump ally. Legal experts say the move exposes how Trump may be overstepping his authority under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), the law he used to justify many of his past tariffs.

Five small U.S. businesses are already suing the government, arguing that Trump exceeded his legal powers when he imposed wide-reaching tariffs on dozens of countries. They won the first round of their case, but the tariffs remain in place as the case moves to the U.S. Court of Appeals. The plaintiffs plan to use the Brazil tariff as evidence that Trump is using national emergency powers for political reasons, not legitimate trade issues.

Trade experts say Brazil’s case is particularly weak. The U.S. has run a trade surplus with Brazil for over 15 years, making it hard to justify emergency economic actions. Critics argue the tariffs have no connection to national security or economic threats, and could ultimately be ruled illegal putting Trump's entire trade strategy at risk in court.

See also: Massive 8.8 Quake Hits Russia’s Far East, Triggers Pacific-Wide Tsunami Alerts

Legal analysts believe Trump’s tariffs, especially those under IEEPA, face a high risk of being overturned. While Brazil hopes to negotiate a deal to avoid the 50 percent tariff set to begin August 1, experts doubt a settlement will be reached in time. Georgetown law professor Jennifer Hillman called the Brazil duties “nonsense,” noting they have no link to a real national emergency and are being used at the president’s personal whim.

Trump’s letter to Lula da Silva, which contained language identical to past tariff threats, also accused Brazil of censorship and election interference none of which fall under legal grounds for economic emergency tariffs. Yale professor Daniel Esty said the move was “shocking” and clearly outside legal bounds.

As the case escalates, trade lawyers in Washington say the administration is shifting strategy. Instead of relying solely on IEEPA, they are invoking more durable laws like Section 301 for unfair trade practices and Section 232 for national security-based tariffs on goods like autos and steel. These laws are more likely to survive legal scrutiny.

Even if IEEPA tariffs are struck down, experts say the administration’s use of stronger legal tools may keep pressure on U.S. trading partners. With countries like Japan and Mexico facing harsh tariffs, the legal fight may not slow the administration’s push for trade concessions just change how it applies the pressure.