Filed Date: April 24, 2025
Case Ongoing
Clearinghouse coding complete
This is one of several cases challenging President Trump’s implementation of tariffs.
This case challenges the legality of tariffs imposed by the President under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) through a series of executive orders in early 2025. On April 24, eleven small businesses, all importers of foreign goods, filed suit in the U.S. Court of International Trade against U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the Department of Homeland Security, the International Trade Commission, the Executive Office of the President, and other federal defendants. Represented by the Pacific Legal Foundation, the plaintiffs argued that Executive Orders 14193, 14194, 14195, and 14257—issued in response to alleged trade imbalances and border-related drug crises—exceeded the President’s statutory authority and violated the Constitution’s separation of powers. They sought declaratory relief, a permanent injunction, and refunds of all unlawfully collected tariffs.
The plaintiffs moved for summary judgment and expedited consideration on May 13, arguing that IEEPA does not authorize the imposition of tariffs and that the statute, as applied, violates the nondelegation doctrine. They also asserted that the President’s invocation of emergency powers lacked a factual basis for finding an “unusual and extraordinary threat,” as required by statute. On May 23, as part of its response, the defendants submitted declarations from multiple cabinet officials—including the Secretaries of State, Treasury, and Commerce—arguing that the tariffs were necessary to preserve sensitive foreign policy negotiations and national security.
On May 28, in two related cases (V.O.S. Selections, Inc. v. Trump and Oregon v. Trump), the same three-judge panel of the Court of International Trade held that the IEEPA tariffs imposed by the President were unlawful and enjoined enforcement of the relevant executive orders nationwide. The court concluded that IEEPA did not authorize the imposition of tariffs, that the President’s declarations did not meet the statutory standard for emergency authority, and that the statute’s delegation of tariff power raised serious constitutional concerns.
On May 30, the government moved to stay proceedings in this case pending resolution of its appeals in V.O.S. and Oregon. Plaintiffs opposed, arguing they were entitled to expedited relief and refunds. On June 16, the court granted the stay, ordering that all proceedings be held in abeyance pending a final, unappealable decision in the related appellate cases, and directing the parties to submit a joint status report and proposed briefing schedule within 60 days after resolution of those appeals.
As of October 24, this case remains stayed pending SCOTUS's decision in V.O.S. Selections, Inc. v. United States. No final judgment has been entered.
Summary Authors
Brian Chen (7/1/2025)
Madeline Kaplan (9/17/2025)
For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69940555/parties/princess-awesome-llc-v-united-states-customs-and-border-protection/
Dunford, Oliver James (District of Columbia)
Attorney-in-Charge, Attorney-in-Charge (District of Columbia)
Bae, Sosun (District of Columbia)
Burke, Claudia (District of Columbia)
Counsel, Office of (District of Columbia)
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69940555/princess-awesome-llc-v-united-states-customs-and-border-protection/
Last updated March 31, 2026, 4:08 a.m.
State / Territory:
Case Type(s):
Presidential/Gubernatorial Authority
Special Collection(s):
Trump Administration 2.0: Challenges to the Government
Key Dates
Filing Date: April 24, 2025
Case Ongoing: Yes
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
A group of eleven small businesses—including toy stores, board game publishers, art dealers, and industrial suppliers—that import goods from abroad.
Plaintiff Type(s):
Public Interest Lawyer: Yes
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
Federal
Department of Homeland Security
Executive Office of the President
President Donald Trump
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
U.S. International Trade Commission
United States of America
Defendant Type(s):
Facility Type(s):
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 551 et seq.
Constitutional Clause(s):
Other Dockets:
U.S. Court of International Trade 1:25-cv-00078
Available Documents:
Outcome
Prevailing Party: None Yet / None
Relief Granted:
Source of Relief:
Issues
Immigration/Border:
Case Summary of Princess Awesome, LLC v. U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Civil Rights Litig. Clearinghouse, https://clearinghouse.net/case/46490/ (last updated 9/17/2025).