Supreme Court Rules Trump Administration’s IEEPA Tariffs are Unlawful
By John H. Kester
The Supreme Court (“SCOTUS”) today held that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (“IEEPA”) did not authorize the President to impose tariffs. Therefore, the Trump Administration’s IEEPA-based duties imposed on China, Canada, and Mexico as well as the so-called “reciprocal” tariffs on tens of countries around the world, are impermissible under the law. The Opinion of the Court was silent as to what mechanism if any there will be for refund of IEEPA duties importers already have paid.
The Ruling as to IEEPA Tariffs:
In its ruling the Supreme Court held that IEEPA was not a lawful basis for President Trump to have imposed the IEEPA tariffs at issue. “Our task today is to decide only whether the power to ‘regulate…importation,’ as granted to the President in IEEPA, embraces the power to impose tariffs. It does not,” stated the Opinion of the Court. “[T]he government cannot identify any statute which the power to regulate includes the power to tax.”
Justice Roberts, in an opinion adopted by only some justices stated, “[t]he President must ‘point to clear congressional authorization’ to justify his extraordinary assertion of the power to impose tariffs…. He cannot.” He further emphasized that viewing IEEPA as allowing the President to impose tariffs “would ‘represent[] a “‘transformative expansion’” of the President’s authority over tariff policy,” and noted that no President had previously invoked IEEPA in order to impose tariffs in the “‘half century of existence’ … let alone tariffs of this magnitude and scope.”
The Ruling’s Silence as to IEEPA Tariff Refunds:
Noticeably absent from the Court’s Opinion was a clear path to refund for importers that have already paid billions of dollars in IEEPA tariffs, as noted by Justice Kavanaugh in his dissent: “The Court says nothing today about whether, and if so how, the Government should go about returning the billions of dollars that it has collected.”
Justice Kavanaugh noted, “[t]he United States may be required to refund billions of dollars to importers who paid the IEEPA” (emphasis added) but the word “may” will be unsatisfying to importers who have already expended billions on tariffs now deemed unlawful by the country’s highest court. Arguably conceding that there will be a refund process, by contrast, Justice Kavanaugh stated, “[a]s was acknowledged at oral argument, the refund process is likely to be a ‘mess.’”
Prior to the SCOTUS ruling, the Court of International Trade (“CIT”) in AGS Co. Auto. Sols. v. U.S. Customs & Border Prot., appeared persuaded that refunds would follow in the event of a Supreme Court ruling against the tariffs, asserting that the government would be prevented from departing from its assertion in Princess Awesome, LLC v. U.S. Customs and Border Prot. that it “will not oppose the [c]ourt’s authority to order reliquidation of entries of merchandise subject to the challenged IEEPA duties and that [it] will refund any IEEPA duties found to have been unlawfully collected, after a final and unappealable decision has been issued finding the duties to have been unlawfully collected and ordering defendants to refund the duties.” (Emphasis added.) While the Supreme Court ruling today declared the IEEPA tariffs unlawful it did not order their refund.
In a press conference after the ruling President Trump said that litigation over tariff refunds will take years. He also announced his intent to impose a new 10% “global tariff” based in a different statute.
Next Steps for Importers:
Faced with a decisive ruling as to the unlawfulness of IEEPA tariffs, and ambiguity as to any refund process, GKG Law reiterates its December 2025 analysis that importers seeking the most conservative approach and greatest insurance of obtaining tariff refunds would be prudent to file a claim for refund with the Court of International Trade before their entries’ liquidation, Customs and Border Protection’s (“CBP’s”) final computation or ascertainment of duties on entries for consumption, which typically occurs at or around 314 days after entry.
GKG Law’s IEEPA tariff litigation team, which includes me, Brendan Collins, and Oliver M. Krischik, has already filed numerous such complaints prior to the SCOTUS ruling, and is prepared to continue to do so swiftly in the days ahead.
Please contact us if you have any questions or are interested in filing such a Complaint.
John H. Kester is a Customs attorney with GKG Law. He additionally passed Customs and Border Protection’s rigorous Customs Broker License Exam and his application for a Customs Broker License is pending. He is reachable at jkester@gkglaw.com.
Brendan Collins and Oliver M. Krischik, Principals with GKG Law, additionally participated in the firm’s numerous filings in opposition to the Section 301 tariffs implemented by President Trump’s first administration. They are reachable at bcollins@gkglaw.com and okrischik@gkglaw.com respectively.