As the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) considers the legality of President Trump’s trade tariffs, some of the impacted companies are going on the offensive to recoup their lost revenue. One of them is Xerox which, alongside Lexmark, filed a suit against the U.S. Customs and Border Protection—and commissioner Randy Scott—in the U.S. Court of International Trade.
The issue at hand is the legality of the president’s application of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The suit, filed Dec. 10, contends IEEPA does not grant the president unlimited power to impose tariffs. Last month, Ricoh USA and five affiliated American subsidiaries levied a similar suit with the U.S. Court of International Trade, per The Recycler.
Citing policy, Xerox spokesperson Justin Capella said the company does not comment on pending litigation.
Enacted at the outset of his administration, President Trump cited the Act to tax goods imported from numerous countries, most notably China. That stung the office equipment manufacturers who source printing gear from China and, by extension, dealers and end-users. The Trump Administration levied the tariffs, in part, to protect U.S. industries and counter unfair trading practices by other countries. Economists are not in agreement on the impact of the tariffs: some claim that they protect jobs while others note that they increase consumer costs.
Ordinarily, the power to regulate commerce and impose tariffs is held by Congress. The U.S. Constitution specifies this in Article I, Section 8. In such cases, legislative proposals can be put forward by individual members of Congress, committees or the executive branch. They are then reviewed by the House of Representatives’ Ways and Means Committee and the Senate’s Finance Committee. Once such a measure passes committee approval, the proposal is debated on the floor of both chambers, at which time members can propose amendments.
The IEEPA, enacted in 1977, was designed to give the president authority to regulate economic transactions during times of national emergency. The power was extended to the executive branch to respond to unusual and extraordinary threats to national security, economy or foreign policy that originate from abroad.
On the www.congress.gov website, a summary of the act notes, “IEEPA provides the president broad authority to regulate a variety of economic transactions following a declaration of national emergency. IEEPA, like the Trading with the Enemy Act (TWEA) from which it branched, sits at the center of the modern U.S. sanctions regime. Changes in the use of IEEPA powers since the act’s enactment in 1977, including its use to impose tariffs on imports from almost all countries in 2025, have caused some Members of Congress and policy analysts to question whether the statute’s oversight provisions are robust enough given the sweeping economic powers it confers upon the President during a declared emergency.”
Two lower court case rulings found the IEEPA tariffs to be illegal. The cases, brought by two sets of small business, were appealed to the high court by the Trump Administration and were combined into one for the sake of the review. SCOTUS heard arguments from both sides on Nov. 4, and it could render a decision on the question of the IEEPA application as soon as January.
Nominate your dealership today!
