The state argued that recent tariff implementations exceeded constitutional boundaries and violated principles of separation of powers.
The state argued that recent tariff implementations exceeded constitutional boundaries and violated principles of separation of powers.
The legal challenge centered on tariffs implemented under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a federal statute that grants the president broad authority to regulate international commerce during declared national emergencies. California contended that the use of this authority to impose tariffs without congressional approval violated constitutional principles governing the separation of powers.