goods

The lawsuit argues Trump bypassed Congress and misused a century-old law to impose sweeping tariffs on Canadian imports.

A US food importer is suing US President Donald Trump over his 50 percent tariffs on Canadian goods, arguing he lacks the legal authority to impose sweeping tariffs without congressional approval.

Gellert Global Group, a New Jersey-based company that imports Canadian cheese, filed the lawsuit on Tuesday in the US Court of International Trade in New York.

The company says the tariffs are driving up its costs and disrupting its relationships with suppliers on both sides of the border. Between September 16 and October 11, Gellert had paid more than $520,000 in duties, according to the complaint.

“Gellert Global Group has spent generations building trusted relationships with suppliers, customers and partners across the food industry,” said Thomas Gellert, the company’s co-chief executive officer, in a press release. “These tariffs disrupt those relationships overnight and create costs and uncertainty that ripple through the entire supply chain.”

The lawsuit challenges Trump’s decision to use a Depression-era law to impose tariffs on a wide range of Canadian products, including dairy products, furniture, clothing and wine.

Trump first imposed the 50 percent tariffs over the summer, accusing Canada of discriminating against American-made cars, alcohol and dairy products. He expanded the measures in September, adding more products in response to Canadian retaliatory tariffs.

The lawsuit argues that the law doesn’t apply to the Canadian policies the Trump administration says are discriminatory, since two of them “arose in response to the president’s own tariffs, while the third involves Canadian dairy policy governed by the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA)”.

It also questions why Canadian cheese is being taxed over disputes involving alcohol and cars.

“No president should have the power to pull a dormant statute off the shelf and use it to impose sweeping tariffs or import bans without the limits Congress required,” said Sara Albrecht, chairman and CEO of the Liberty Justice Center, a nonprofit legal organisation that filed the suit on Gellert’s behalf.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment, according to the Reuters news agency.

At the centre of the case is Section 338 of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930, which allows the president to impose tariffs of up to 50 percent on imports from countries found to discriminate against American businesses.

The provision had never been used until Trump invoked it this year.

The lawsuit argues that newer laws passed by Congress since then, such as Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, require investigations, public comment and other safeguards that Gellert says the Trump administration has bypassed, and that these override Section 338.

“The administration cannot skip those protections by reaching for a 1930 statute that no president had ever used to impose a tariff,” said Jeffrey Schwab, the Liberty Justice Center’s senior counsel and director of litigation.

In addition, the lawsuit says that even if Trump is allowed to use the older law, he hasn’t met its requirements, including waiting 30 days before tariffs can be collected on new products added to the list.

The administration only waited seven days to start collecting tariffs on cheese in September, according to the lawsuit.

Gellert is asking the court to declare the tariffs illegal, stop them from being collected, and order refunds with interest for importers who have been impacted.

The lawsuit marks the fourth major legal challenge to Trump’s tariffs.

In February, the US Supreme Court struck down most of the tariffs he imposed in 2025, and a trade court later ruled against a temporary 10 percent global tariff. A separate challenge to tariffs imposed over alleged forced labour in international trade is still pending.

The halt to commercial shipments, including fruit and winter clothing, cuts off a key source of critical supplies.

Israeli authorities say no commercial goods have entered Gaza for two days, citing what they claim is a tax dispute between local merchants and Hamas.

COGAT, or the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories, the Israeli military body that “oversees humanitarian affairs” in Gaza, announced the halt on Wednesday.

COGAT claimed that local merchants “made the decision in response to a 10,000 shekel ($3,220) fee imposed by Hamas on each truck entering Gaza” as well as a demand for 30 percent of all sales in Gaza to be carried out in cash.

This decision is expected to impact a crucial source of food and goods for the 2.1 million people in the Strip, who are completely reliant on Israel’s border crossings in a territory that is still suffering from famine.

Gaza’s government media office refuted the claims on Thursday and condemned the “blatant disinformation campaign and false statement”.

The media office instead said it was an attempt “to hold the government apparatus in Gaza responsible for the disruption of truck entry” and that the fee was a voluntary payment to a fund providing aid for those in need, such as widows and orphans.

It also said that cash payments were encouraged due to what it described as an acute cash shortage in the war-torn territory, but were never a mandatory requirement.

An already dire humanitarian crisis

The halt to commercial shipments, including fruit and winter clothing, cuts off a key source of food and other critical supplies as fears mount ahead of the encroaching winter.

Aid groups generally bring in staples such as flour, while merchants import more perishable foods like fruits and meat, according to data released earlier this year by COGAT.

The suspension is raising fears about affordability, with humanitarian workers saying a combination of aid and a robust commercial market is needed to keep prices under control.

“The humanitarian sector on its own cannot meet the needs of all the people,” said Shaina Low, a spokesperson for the Norwegian Refugee Council. “The markets need to be functioning.”

Local merchants step in

The head of Gaza’s private truckers union, Nahed Sheheiber, denied the Israeli narrative, saying: “The Israeli coordinator is claiming that Gaza’s merchants are responsible, but the truth is that the Israelis are the ones who imposed the restrictions.”

Following COGAT’s announcement, Sheheiber’s union met with Gaza’s Ministry of Economy to express concern and say Israel was citing fees levied by the ministry as a pretext to cut off commercial goods.

A global hunger monitor in July warned that more than two-thirds of people in Gaza could face acute hunger by the year-end.

Israel is obliged under a US-mediated agreement to allow a minimum of 600 trucks carrying humanitarian aid to enter Gaza each day.

Diplomats say that far fewer than 600 trucks normally enter Gaza each day. Sheheiber said the figure was closer to 300, with two-thirds carrying commercial goods.