Filed Date: Feb. 3, 2025
Case Ongoing
Clearinghouse coding complete
This case challenged President Trump's imposition of tariffs on various countries. On February 3, 2025, Gary Barnes, a pro se plaintiff, sued President Trump and the United States in the Court of International Trade, alleging that the tariffs imposed by President Trump violated the Constitution's separation of powers by performing duties delegated to the legislative branch. The plaintiff requested preliminary and permanent injunctive relief banning President Trump from imposing any tariffs or collecting duties on those already imposed. The case was assigned to Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves.
On March 21, 2025, the defendants moved to dismiss the case, arguing that the plaintiff lacked standing to bring his case. The court agreed on May 23, 2025, ordering the case to be dismissed without prejudice but allowing the plaintiff until June 23 to remedy the pleading deficiencies found by the court. Specifically, the court found that the plaintiff had failed to allege an injury in fact, since his claim that President Trump had violated the Constitution was based on an alleged violation of “the right, possessed by every citizen, to require that the Government be administered according to law," which is "abstract and cannot support Article III standing." The court also rejected the plaintiff's alleged economic injury from the tariffs as sufficient to confer standing, since the alleged injury would not be particularized but would "adversely affect the household income of [the plaintiff] and all United States citizens." Therefore, the court found that the plaintiff's injury was speculative and not particularized, which failed to meet the requirements for Article III standing. 2025 WL 1483384.
On June 19, the plaintiff filed a motion asking the judge "to reverse her decision to dismiss this suit and issue an injunction against President Trump’s issuing any more unconstitutional Executive Orders involving tariffs that put in place duties." The defendants filed an answer to the motion on July 21, arguing that the filing was not an amended complaint that remedied the defects found by the court but actually a motion to reconsider the court's decision to dismiss the plaintiff's first complaint. As such, the defendants argued that the court should not reconsider its prior ruling but instead should dismiss the case.
The case is ongoing.
Summary Authors
Jeremiah Price (6/13/2025)
For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69616158/parties/barnes-v-united-states/
Barnes, Gary L. (District of Columbia)
Laufgraben, Eric Evan (District of Columbia)
Mathers, Luke (District of Columbia)
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69616158/barnes-v-united-states/
Last updated Aug. 21, 2025, 2:31 p.m.
State / Territory: District of Columbia
Case Type(s):
Presidential/Gubernatorial Authority
Special Collection(s):
Trump Administration 2.0: Challenges to the Government
Trump Administration 2.0: Challenges to the Government (Tariffs)
Key Dates
Filing Date: Feb. 3, 2025
Case Ongoing: Yes
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
A pro se litigant challenging President Trump's imposition of tariffs.
Plaintiff Type(s):
Public Interest Lawyer: No
Filed Pro Se: Yes
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
United States (- United States (national) -), Federal
Defendant Type(s):
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Ex Parte Young (Federal) or Bivens
Ex parte Young (federal or state officials)
Constitutional Clause(s):
Available Documents:
Outcome
Prevailing Party: None Yet / None
Nature of Relief:
Source of Relief:
Issues
Immigration/Border: