Could 'Princess Awesome' Defeat Trump's Tariffs?
Small businesses and a dozen states have filed a pair of lawsuits challenging Trump's authority to impose tariffs on board games, clothes, and lots of other things.

It sounds like something out of a comic book: Princess Awesome vs. Tariff Man.
And, as so often seems to be the case in those stories, the would-be hero faces daunting odds against a powerful villain, with the fate of the world—or at least a chunk of the global economy—hanging in the balance.
Princess Awesome LLC, a Maryland-based shop that sells nerdy apparel for kids and adults, is one of several plaintiffs in a new lawsuit challenging the legitimacy of President Donald Trump's unilateral tariff powers. Other plaintiffs in the suit include five sellers of tabletop games and board games, an art studio, a kitchen supply company, and a toy store. All say they have paid tariffs or expect to have to pay them in the near future, as their businesses depend on imports.
In a blog post on the company's website earlier this month, Princess Awesome cofounder Rebecca Melsky showed how tariffs were increasing the prices of her products. "It's bad for the world, for the country, for you, and for all companies, but particularly small ones," she wrote. "Big businesses will have an easier time absorbing the extra costs and passing them on to the consumer."
In the complaint filed this week, Princess Awesome says it has already paid over $1,000 in tariffs this year, with more payments expected on upcoming shipments from Bangladesh, India, and Peru.
One of Princess Awesome's sidekicks in the lawsuit is Stonemaier Games, a board game company founded in 2012. Orders that are ready to ship from China could cost the company "millions [of dollars] in tariffs," the lawsuit alleges.
"We will not stand idle while our livelihood—and the livelihoods of thousands of small business owners and contractors in the U.S.—are treated like pawns in a political game," said Jamey Stegmaier, cofounder of Stonemaier Games, in a statement. "We now face a $14.50 tariff tax for every $10 we spent on manufacturing with our trusted long-term partner in China. For Stonemaier Games, that amounts to upcoming tariff payments of nearly $1.5 million."
The lawsuit was filed this week in the U.S. Court of International Trade, a special federal court that handles disputes over tariffs and trade deals, by the Pacific Legal Foundation. It alleges that Trump overstepped the authority granted by the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) when he announced a universal 10 percent tariff on all imports to the United States earlier this month. The Trump administration has also used IEEPA to impose massive tariffs on imports from China.
The lawsuit argues that Trump's use of IEEPA is unlawful since the law does not explicitly give presidents the power to levy tariffs. It also argues, as other critics of Trump's tariffs have, that the law allows for presidential action only in response to an "unusual and extraordinary threat," and that the free exchange of goods across national borders does not qualify as either.
Separate from the Princess Awesome lawsuit, 12 states filed a lawsuit in the U.S. Court of International Trade on Wednesday, also challenging Trump's tariffs on the grounds that the president overstepped the powers granted by IEEPA.
"The president does not have the power to raise taxes on a whim, but that's exactly what President Trump has been doing with these tariffs," New York Attorney General Letitia James, one of the 12 state attorneys general who filed the lawsuit, said in a statement.
Both the attorneys general and the small business owners are right. Board games, clothes, and other imported goods do not constitute an "unusual" or "extraordinary" threat that justifies a massive tax increase on Americans. Trump's tariffs are economically foolish and legally dubious. Courts (and Congress) should move quickly to strike them down.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
It alleges that Trump overstepped the authority granted by the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) when he announced a universal 10 percent tariff on all imports to the United States earlier this month.
And where the fuck is Congress? Someone needs to bomb the Capitol. The most useless sacks of shit in govt.
nobody needs to bomb the Capitol. mind the nap.
Nap?
The only thing they've done is - two of them have died and they agreed to set aside space for Carters funeral.
What they need is - a lot more Dying Time.
Look, would you mind not attracting the attention of the FBI to Reason?
come and see the violence inherent in the system!
https://youtu.be/en28Dankfd4
The Capitol desperately needs to be bombed BECAUSE of the non aggression principle.
And where the fuck is Congress?
Busy passing house rules so they can cowardly submit to Trump and pathetically hide from their constituents who overwhelmingly oppose tariffs.
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/5240652-house-gop-trump-tariffs-vote/
what if they submit pathetically and hide cowardly?
That will work.
cool I like it better.
It's funny how power works. Congress was happy to sign away tariff and other power to the President, because government kept on getting more intrusive and powerful and they hated being held responsible for what the other 534 dimwits had done come election time. So much easier to pass the buck, then complain (uselessly) that the guy in power was doing the wrong thing.
I hate politicians.
no commodity is more valuable than the upending of the WWF.
The World Wildlife Fund?
world wrestling federation am I the only one left who remembers?
Bro. Trademark infringement isn't cool.
Don't say stupid shit. Don't quote stupid shit.
When all your inputs go up in price, the size of your business doesn't matter.
If you need to hire a dozen lawyers to abide by regulations, then size matters. But not here.
Kinda specifically the opposite.
The larger businesses specifically ossify supply chains and pay lawyers and lobbyists to safeguard them against disruption from both political and competitive sources. If you need 100k widgets a day, you get them from China. If you're some sort of insane OPSEC freak (apparently) *maybe* you secondary source at 1/10th of the scale from Brazil or Pakistan or India or wherever.
If you need 1k widgets a month, maybe you wait it out, maybe you bought 10k up front when the price was lower, maybe you source them from Pakistan or Brazil or India, maybe your source them from local more boutique manufacturers/suppliers piecemeal, maybe you legally employ a mule to drive half a U-Haul with 1k widgets across the border more cheaply than you could pay a lawyer or lobbyist...
This was the case in Rome. This was the case with the EIC. This was a contributing factor to the US Civil War...
Obviously not every business in every industry is similarly (dis)advantaged, but Reason's take that everyone participating in trade, most of all themselves, is some sort of virtuous hero protagonist is doing them more harm than good.
Can somebody explain to me how a small store will be able to get past Section 2 of Article III's jurisdictional restriction of courts to actual cases and controversies and allow them to set national trade policies? Seems a bit of stretch.
I'm not a lawyer, but the actual case is a law (tariffs) that affects this small business. The court does nor determine trade policy, but it does determine the constitutionality of laws and how they were enacted including laws regarding trade policy.
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;—to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;—to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;—to Controversies between two or more States;...between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.
Next up, corner hot dog stand sues to end Russian embargoes!
Inferior Courts ARE THE LAW. They don't have to abide by rules or procedures.
Yeah, it's terrible when citizens can challenge the rules of their elite superiors in a republic.
Is Princess Awesome trans? If not, she has no magic powers in the 21st century.
Even worse she's obviously Caucasian. If she's not a lesbian her lawsuit is going nowhere. But she does have some notable cleavage going on which can't hurt.
It does sound like a drag show name.
Yeah I had a small trucking business in 2020 and my cost of diesel dropped to 1.45 a gallon when the covidians crashed the economy. A year later the cost had tripled. Rates didn't. Shit happens. Take the hit and move on.
If you're looking to try your luck with something fun and engaging, I recommend checking out some online bingo platforms. There's a lot of potential to win big, especially with the wide variety of games available. For example, you can find a great selection at bingo games with exciting rewards, where the bingo experience is enhanced with exciting odds and interactive features. It's always thrilling to explore new betting options, and online casinos offer a perfect combination of entertainment and potential rewards. Give it a shot and see what kind of wins you can secure!
Did you pay for a subscription to post that?