Fact Check: California Claims Trump's Actions Exceed Executive Authority and Threaten State Sovereignty
What We Know
California's Governor Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta filed a lawsuit against President Trump, asserting that his unilateral imposition of tariffs exceeds his executive authority and threatens the state's sovereignty. The lawsuit, filed in April 2025, argues that Trump lacks the legal basis to impose tariffs under the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA), which does not explicitly authorize such actions. The lawsuit claims that these tariffs have caused significant economic harm to California, the largest state economy in the U.S., and have disrupted supply chains, driven up prices, and inflicted billions in damages on the state's economy (Governor Newsom files lawsuit to end President Trump’s tariffs).
The suit invokes the U.S. Supreme Court's major questions doctrine, which requires that significant actions taken by the executive branch must have clear authorization from Congress. This doctrine has been applied in recent cases to strike down executive actions that lack explicit legislative backing (Governor Newsom suing President Trump and Department of ...).
Analysis
The claim that Trump's actions exceed executive authority is supported by the legal arguments presented in the lawsuit. The IEEPA allows the President to respond to national emergencies but does not explicitly mention tariffs as an authorized action. This interpretation aligns with the major questions doctrine, which emphasizes that the executive branch cannot unilaterally make decisions on matters of vast economic significance without congressional approval (Governor Newsom files lawsuit to end President Trump’s tariffs).
The credibility of the sources is bolstered by the involvement of multiple states, including Washington, which have also challenged Trump's actions on similar grounds. This coalition reflects a broader concern among states about the potential overreach of executive power (Washington and California lead coalition of states to ...). Furthermore, bipartisan criticism from various political figures, including Republican senators, indicates that the issue transcends party lines, suggesting a widespread recognition of the potential dangers of unilateral executive actions (Governor Newsom files lawsuit to end President Trump’s tariffs).
However, it is essential to consider the political context in which these claims are made. The lawsuit is part of a broader political struggle between state governments and the federal administration, particularly under Trump, who has often positioned himself against state-level policies. This context may introduce some bias, as the motivations behind the lawsuit could be influenced by political opposition rather than purely legal considerations.
Conclusion
The claim that California asserts Trump's actions exceed executive authority and threaten state sovereignty is True. The legal arguments presented in the lawsuit highlight significant concerns regarding the limits of presidential power, particularly in relation to economic policy and state rights. The invocation of the major questions doctrine and the bipartisan criticism of Trump's tariff actions further substantiate California's position.
