California Attorney General Rob Bonta and Governor Gavin Newsom, joined by a coalition of 22 attorneys general and the states of Kentucky and Pennsylvania, have announced a new lawsuit challenging President Trump’s use of Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 to impose global tariffs. The suit, which will be filed in the Court of International Trade, claims that the President’s actions do not meet the limited conditions required by law.
Attorney General Bonta stated: “American consumers and business owners have made it clear they do not want tariffs, yet President Trump has tried over and over again to implement them. This time, the President is attempting to use an obscure law as a tool for his tariffs, and is yet again, going about it illegally. This is not new terrain for California, but it is exasperating. Why is President Trump — who ran on the promise of making life more affordable for families — breaking the law to raise the cost of living for Americans? California has challenged the illegal imposition of tariffs time and time again because this question matters enormously for Californians who are already struggling with rising costs. For the 60th time since he took office, we’ll see the President in court.”
Governor Newsom added: “These tariffs are nothing more than a tax on working families — shifting the burden of Trump’s failed trade negotiations onto folks who are already struggling to make ends meet. Trump keeps throwing out illegal, reckless policies, hoping something sticks, while everyday Americans pay the price. Trump’s tariffs were overturned by the Supreme Court, so now he’s inflicting new tariffs on Californians and all Americans like a toddler throwing a temper tantrum. Chaos is not leadership. And we deserve better.”
The background provided indicates that previous attempts by President Trump to impose tariffs under different statutes have been met with legal challenges from California officials. In February 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Trump’s earlier tariffs under IEEPA were unlawful. Following this decision, President Trump issued a proclamation using Section 122 to set a 10% tariff on most products globally—later raising it to 15%. Section 122 allows such measures only under specific circumstances related to international payments problems and limits their duration without congressional approval.
According to information from the official website, Rob Bonta leads the California Attorney General’s office, which acts as the state’s chief law enforcement authority across California and forms part of its executive branch as outlined in the state constitution.
The lawsuit argues that none of President Trump’s justifications—such as ongoing trade deficits or negative income balances—meet Section 122’s requirements for imposing such tariffs. Additionally, exemptions granted in his proclamation violate rules requiring nondiscriminatory treatment among countries and uniform application across products.
California has previously filed lawsuits against what it calls unlawful tariff actions by President Trump without congressional consent and participated in multiple cases before federal courts regarding these issues.
The case is led by Attorney General Rob Bonta along with attorneys general from Oregon (Dan Rayfield), Arizona (Kris Mayes), New York (Letitia James), Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin; also joining are governors from Kentucky and Pennsylvania.
The California Attorney General’s office advances policies related to civil rights and consumer protection throughout California.
A recent Yale report cited in background materials found that these types of tariffs led to an average family losing $1,751 last year.
In addition to litigation efforts against these tariff policies at various judicial levels—including amicus briefs in federal appellate courts—the Attorney General has held discussions with business leaders in San Francisco and Los Angeles about how such trade measures impact industries statewide.
