New York, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona, California Plus More US States Sue Trump Over Tariff Blitz and Border Crackdown as Tourism from Canada, France, Brazil, Japan, and Mexico Collapses

A growing coalition of U.S. states—including New York, California, Illinois, Minnesota, Colorado, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, and others—has launched a sweeping legal revolt against former President Donald Trump’s chaotic tariff blitz and aggressive border crackdown, arguing that his actions have violated constitutional limits, destabilized trade, and triggered a collapse in tourism. Through coordinated lawsuits filed in federal and international trade courts, these states accuse Trump of abusing emergency powers to impose arbitrary tariffs and border restrictions, leading to plummeting international arrivals, disrupted travel flows, and billions in lost tourism revenue across the country.

Oregon, Arizona, and Colorado Lead Initial Legal Offensive

Oregon, Arizona, and Colorado have emerged at the forefront of this legal opposition. These states joined nine others in suing the Trump administration in the U.S. Court of International Trade, asserting that the tariffs were unlawful, economically reckless, and imposed without Congressional authorization.

The lawsuit contends that Trump misused the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to justify tariffs, which were placed not in response to a legitimate emergency, but rather based on the president’s “whims.” According to the complaint, the administration has repeatedly shifted the scope and targets of the tariffs, creating “immense and ever-changing” economic burdens on the states.

Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes called Trump’s tariff plan “insane,” adding that “it is not only economically reckless—it is illegal.” Colorado echoed these sentiments, pointing to harm inflicted on exporters and importers across sectors including manufacturing, agriculture, and consumer goods.

Connecticut, Delaware, and Maine Denounce Legal Overreach

Connecticut, Delaware, and Maine are among the states that joined the 12-member coalition contesting the tariffs in court. Connecticut Attorney General William Tong sharply criticized the administration’s trade policies, stating, “Trump’s lawless and chaotic tariffs are a massive tax on Connecticut families and a disaster for Connecticut businesses and jobs.”

These states argue that the president cannot invoke IEEPA arbitrarily to bypass Congress and unilaterally reshape trade policy. The legal filing emphasizes that only Congress has the constitutional authority to impose tariffs, and the president’s role is limited to responding to “unusual and extraordinary threats” from foreign entities—conditions which, the states argue, were not met.

New York and Illinois Amplify Resistance from Major Economic Hubs

New York and Illinois have played central roles in the legal campaign, asserting that Trump’s policies have had an outsized negative impact on their economies. As major centers for tourism, international trade, and immigration, these states report dramatic downturns in visitor arrivals, business travel, and cross-border commerce.

New York, in particular, reported a significant drop in inbound tourism since the new border restrictions were enacted. Visa backlogs have worsened, traveler screening has intensified, and international visitors—especially from Canada, France, Brazil, and Japan—have opted to reroute their trips away from the United States.

Illinois has raised alarms over manufacturing slowdowns and agricultural export losses linked to retaliatory tariffs. The state government has argued that these disruptions are not only avoidable but stem from a deliberate abuse of federal authority for political gain.

Minnesota, Nevada, and New Mexico Detail Tourism Collapse

Minnesota, Nevada, and New Mexico have directly connected Trump’s trade and border measures to steep declines in tourism, especially from key markets in Europe, Latin America, and Asia. In Nevada, where tourism represents over a quarter of the state’s GDP, visitor numbers to Las Vegas dropped sharply following increased visa scrutiny and longer entry screening processes.

New Mexico, a border state, reported that regional travel from Mexico has plummeted due to heightened security checks and cross-border tension. The local hospitality industry has seen hotel bookings fall and international festivals canceled due to lower foreign attendance.

Minnesota, known for its medical tourism and international student programs, flagged a significant drop in inbound travelers. State leaders say that the perception of the U.S. as unwelcoming to foreigners, coupled with erratic tariff policies, has pushed international travelers toward destinations in Canada, Europe, and Southeast Asia.

Vermont, Oregon, and California Highlight Constitutional Crisis

Vermont and Oregon have not only emphasized economic damage but also raised alarms about the constitutional implications of the Trump administration’s actions. The joint lawsuit filed in the New York court accuses Trump of dismantling the separation of powers, arguing that the IEEPA was never intended to serve as a blank check for arbitrary economic warfare.

California filed a separate lawsuit in the Northern District Court, claiming that as the largest importer in the U.S., it stands to lose billions in port revenue, customs duties, and international trade volume. Governor Gavin Newsom’s office described the policy as “a violation of federal law and a reckless threat to California’s economic future.”

California’s ports—Long Beach and Los Angeles—have seen a sharp decline in container volume as global trade partners reroute goods through Canada, Mexico, and East Asia to avoid unpredictable U.S. duties.

Sanctuary State Showdown: Border Crackdown Triggers Migration Fallout

Alongside trade and tariff disputes, many of these same states have also pushed back hard against Trump’s immigration and border enforcement agenda. Sanctuary jurisdictions including New York, California, Illinois, and Oregon have refused to comply with federal efforts to deputize local police to carry out immigration raids.

A federal judge recently ruled in San Francisco that Trump could not bypass court injunctions protecting sanctuary states and cities from having their federal funding revoked. This ruling was hailed as a victory for states asserting their right to determine local law enforcement priorities.

Governors from sanctuary states are also scheduled to testify before Congress to defend their policies. They maintain that welcoming immigrants and foreign travelers—rather than detaining or excluding them—benefits state economies, enhances cultural ties, and boosts tourism.

The Travel Fallout: Visa Waits, Airport Delays, and Lost Revenue

The combination of erratic tariff impositions and tougher border restrictions has hit U.S. tourism hard. According to industry reports, visitor arrivals from key allies have fallen dramatically:

• Canada: Down 18% in Q1 2025
• France: Down 16%
• Brazil: Down 12%
• Japan: Down 14%
• Mexico: Down 21%

Travel booking platforms like Expedia and Airbnb have cited falling demand in U.S. destinations, particularly in California, New York, and Nevada. Hotel chains have posted declining revenue forecasts, and airline carriers report that U.S. international bookings are increasingly underperforming.

The National Travel and Tourism Office (NTTO) has warned of a $45 billion projected shortfall in tourism-related revenue by the end of 2025 if current conditions persist.

Trump Administration’s Defense and State Pushback

The Trump administration has defended the tariffs and border measures as necessary tools to address a “national emergency” threatening American industries and sovereignty. White House spokesperson Kush Desai stated, “The administration remains committed to addressing this crisis with every tool at our disposal, from tariffs to negotiations.”

State officials, however, argue that no such emergency exists and that the policies have only isolated the U.S. from its global partners. The lawsuits assert that the constitutional requirement for congressional oversight has been ignored and that Trump’s measures lack both transparency and accountability.

A wave of lawsuits from US states including New York, California, Illinois, and others accuses Trump of unlawfully imposing sweeping tariffs and enacting a chaotic border crackdown that bypasses congressional authority. These actions, states argue, have triggered a collapse in tourism from key global markets like Canada, France, Brazil, Japan, and Mexico—crippling local economies and damaging America’s travel sector.

State Rebellion and the Future of U.S. Tourism

The growing list of states—now including New York, California, Illinois, Oregon, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, and Vermont—marks one of the most unified state-level legal offensives against federal economic policy in recent U.S. history.

As travel collapses and tourism plunges into freefall, these states are making a forceful stand—not only to defend their economies but to restore the constitutional balance of powers. Whether the courts side with the states or uphold the federal administration’s sweeping authority will likely shape the future of U.S. trade, tourism, and governance in the years ahead.