Learning Resources, Inc, an Illinois-based manufacturer of educational toys. sue President Donald Trump and several Cabinet officials in DC on Tuesday, calling it “the power grab for the administrative division.”
The lawsuit is one of several filed against customs duties. However, unlike California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s case, it is likely that he is not standing, but the learning resource lawsuit has plaintiffs who suffered clear and direct damage.
Ironically, learning resources are exactly what Trump tariffs are useful. It is a relatively small, fourth-generation family-owned manufacturing industry that makes products loved by customers with hundreds of jobs in the United States.
CEO Rick Woldenberg says he is ready to move more manufacturing operations to the US, but when it takes time and tariffs are standing there, he will go out of business before he does.
“The plaintiffs have survived and faced serious challenges over the past 20 years, including the Great Recession and the Covid-19 pandemic, but the president’s unilateral tariffs now pose the biggest challenge for their existence.” Complaint say.
The company relies on imports from a variety of other countries, including China, and tax bills are increasing overnight as tariffs are paid by American importers before other countries owe the indirect costs.
“The plaintiff, who previously planned to increase sales by 8%, is currently planning to reduce sales in 2025, from 25% to 50% year-on-year,” the complaint states.
Learning resources claim that President Trump has exceeded his authority. “The Constitution and the International Emergency Economic Force Act (“IEEPA”) do not grant the president’s tariff reading authority, not to mention the infinite kinds of things that are claimed here.”
Add (original emphasis):
It is not clear that Ieepa’s simple text will allow the President to approve or impose far fewer tariffs on any size, duration and range. The Act does not address “customer duties,” “duties,” or other mechanisms for generating revenue. And no president has used Ieepa to impose tariffs in the past.
…
Certainly, if Congress gave the President the power to impose tariffs and duties, it did so through a highly reticulated statutory scheme where their approval was clear and their scope was limited. Laws such as the Tariff Act of 1930 and the Trade Act of 1974 provide the power to impose tariffs on the President; There is no law That authority is stipulated by simply saying that the President can “regulate” imports and exports. Instead, laws that provide the authority to impose customs duties provide that authority through languages that expressly refer to customs duties and obligations to generate revenue.
…
Even if tariffs can handle the trade deficit and the circumstances that cause them, the tariffs imposed by the President are very broad as they apply to countries where we run trade surpluses and countries that do not charge tariffs on American goods.
The lawsuit also opposes the way tariffs were calculated and calls them arbitrarily, claiming that “mutual” tariff charges were calculated not by examining the fees these countries charge the United States, but by identifying specific non-tariff barriers to trade.
The case is Learning Resources v. TrumpUS District Court for the District of Columbia, No. 1:25-CV-01248.
Joel B. Pollack is a senior editor at Breitbart News; Breitbart News Sunday Sirius XM Patriot will be available Sundays from 7pm to 10pm (4pm to 7pm). He is the author of Agenda: What Trump Should Do in His First 100 Daysyou can pre-order on Amazon. He is also the author Trump’s Virtue: Lessons and Legacy of President Donald TrumpIt is now available on Audible. He is the winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. Follow him on Twitter @joelpollak.
