Food importer challenges 50% Canada tariffs

On Oct. 20, 2026, the Liberty Justice Center filed a lawsuit in the U.S. Court of International Trade on behalf of Gellert Global Group, a food importer and distributor based in New Jersey. The suit seeks to overturn 50% duties the administration has imposed on selected Canadian imports as part of an ongoing trade dispute. The case adds a new front to legal efforts testing how far the executive branch can go in using trade statutes to impose tariffs.

The complaint focuses on steep levies that directly affect the company’s import operations. These duties raise the cost of bringing Canadian products into the United States, affecting the pricing and competitiveness of goods such as food items in the U.S. market. By challenging the tariffs, the importer is seeking relief from measures it argues are unlawful and economically damaging.

At the center of the lawsuit is the administration’s invocation of Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930 as the legal basis for the 50% tariffs. Section 338 is a longstanding trade statute that allows the United States to respond to certain foreign trade practices. The complaint argues that the proclamations issued under this provision to cover the Canadian measures exceed the scope of authority permitted by the law.

The filing asks the Court of International Trade to declare the Section 338-based proclamations unlawful. It further requests that the court enjoin, or block, the continued enforcement and collection of the 50% duties on the covered Canadian products. By placing the statutory interpretation of Section 338 before the trade court, the case will scrutinize how broadly presidential power can be read under this rarely used authority in the current dispute.

Beyond stopping future collections, Gellert Global’s complaint also seeks financial redress for tariffs already paid. The legal filing asks the court to order refunds of any duties collected under the contested Section 338 proclamations. It also requests that those refunds be paid with interest, reflecting the time value of funds that have been remitted to the government.

If the court grants the requested relief, it would not only halt the 50% tariffs for the plaintiff but could also influence how similar measures are applied to other importers subject to the same proclamations. The case therefore carries implications for both the specific Canadian products at issue and broader U.S. tariff policy grounded in Section 338.

The lawsuit forms part of a larger pattern of legal challenges to the administration’s tariff policies. Previous suits have successfully contested other tariffs, and this new filing extends the scrutiny to the 50% duties on selected Canadian imports. By taking the dispute to the Court of International Trade, the plaintiff is using a specialized judicial forum that regularly evaluates trade statutes and presidential actions affecting imports.

The outcome of this case will help define the boundaries of executive authority under the Tariff Act of 1930 in current trade disputes. A ruling on the legality of using Section 338 for these Canadian tariffs could shape how future administrations deploy similar tools, and how importers assess legal risks and remedies when new duties are imposed.