Second Federal Court Ruling Yesterday Echoes Concerns Raised in Brief
San Francisco, CA — A federal court yesterday granted Consumer Watchdog’s motion for leave to file an amicus curiae – or “friend of the court” – brief challenging President Donald Trump’s assertion of sweeping emergency powers to impose tariffs without congressional approval. Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California accepted the brief for filing in State of California v. Trump (Case No. 3:25-cv-03372-JSC).
The brief, lead-authored by constitutional law scholar Alan B. Morrison, argues that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) does not authorize the President to unilaterally impose tariffs. It urges the court to reject the administration’s interpretation of IEEPA as lacking any statutory basis and warns that, if accepted, it would raise grave constitutional concerns under the separation of powers and nondelegation doctrines.
“If Congress had enacted these tariffs, there would be no constitutional objection,” the brief states. “But none of that happens when, as with these tariffs, the President acts unilaterally and promulgates them on his own, solely based on his views of what the tariff policy of the United States shall be on any given day.”
Consumer Watchdog’s brief stresses that Congress has enacted numerous statutes over the years specifically addressing when and how the President may impose tariffs—none of which include IEEPA. “Congress knows very well how to authorize the President… to change the tariffs that Congress has enacted,” the brief explains. “It did not do so in IEEPA.”
The brief applies the Supreme Court’s major questions and nondelegation doctrines to the tariff action, pointing out that under Defendants’ interpretation, there are no limits in the statute on tariff size, duration, scope, or process—and no provision for judicial review.
“The absence of boundaries in the statute is the very heart of the non-delegation problem,” the brief states. “If section 1702 is read as Defendants urge, it would run afoul of the nondelegation doctrine.”
In its conclusion, the brief urges the court to adopt a statutory reading that avoids constitutional issues, but states that if the court must reach them, it should find the statute unconstitutional as applied:
“Such a holding would appropriately avoid the serious constitutional questions raised by the President’s actions—questions that, if reached, would compel the conclusion that IEEPA, as interpreted by Defendants, violates the Constitution’s separation of powers and the nondelegation doctrine. … The Court should reject this sweeping and dangerous assertion of executive power.”
Consumer Watchdog filed the brief in the case to preserve constitutional legal boundaries that prevent the executive branch from exercising broad legislative powers without congressional authorization – powers that affect market stability and have the potential to result in higher costs for essential goods and services for consumers.
Read the brief here.
In a separate but related development, the U.S. Court of International Trade yesterday issued a sweeping ruling in V.O.S. Selections, Inc. v. United States, Slip Op. 25-66, Court Nos. 25-00066 & 25-00077 (Ct. Int’l Trade May 28, 2025), setting aside tariffs imposed under IEEPA and rejecting the government’s claim of unbounded presidential authority. The CIT concluded that IEEPA does not confer tariff power on the President and cited the lack of statutory limits as central to its ruling.
While Consumer Watchdog’s brief was filed in a different proceeding, the CIT’s opinion reflects key arguments raised in the amicus filing—including the lack of textual authority for tariffs in IEEPA, the threat of unchecked executive discretion, and the need to interpret statutes narrowly to avoid unconstitutional delegations.
“We’re encouraged that courts are scrutinizing these assertions of executive power,” said Will Pletcher, Litigation Director at Consumer Watchdog. “The CIT’s ruling and the acceptance of our brief by the Northern District together show that courts will uphold these the statutory and constitutional limits to protect consumers.”
Consumer Watchdog filed the brief to defend both consumer interests and democratic accountability. Emergency powers, the organization contends, must not become a backdoor for imposing regressive economic burdens on working families without congressional oversight.
The brief was filed with distinguished co-counsel Alan Morrison, the Lerner Family Associate Dean at The George Washington University Law School; and Will Planert, a partner at Morris, Manning & Martin LLP with extensive experience in trade and regulatory litigation.
