On February 20, 2026, the Supreme Court issued a long-awaited decision on the legality of President Donald Trump’s worldwide tariffs, in which it held that “IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs.” Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, 607 U.S. __ (2026).
The majority opinion was authored by Chief Justice Roberts, joined by Justices Barrett, Gorsuch, Kagan, Sotomayor and Jackson. The crux of the decision is that the tariffs imposed by President Trump under the alleged authority of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) are invalid.
In a lengthy dissent, Justice Kavanaugh, joined by Justices Thomas and Alito, concluded that as IEEPA provides the authority to regulate importation, if tariffs regulate importation, they are authorized under IEEPA. The dissenting justices then conclude that, “[s]tatutory text, history, and precedent demonstrate that the answer is clearly yes: Like quotas and embargoes, tariffs are a traditional and common tool to regulate importation.”
The bottom line is that, despite the dissent, the previously ordered global tariffs are not authorized under IEEPA. Of course, since the Supreme Court only considers matters brought before it, it is unknown whether the president’s subsequently issued imposition of tariffs under other claimed authorities will be similarly invalidated.
Background and Legal Challenges
Throughout 2025 and into 2026, President Trump has declared several national emergencies and invoked the IEEPA to impose sweeping tariffs of unlimited duration on nearly all goods imported from nearly all of our country’s trading partners. To date, United States importers and consumers have paid an estimated $175 billion in IEEPA tariffs.
Legal challenges followed. On May 28, 2025, the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) granted summary judgment to five small businesses and 12 states in a consolidated order, holding that tariffs imposed under Executive Orders Nos. 14193, 14194, 14195, 14257 and 14266 (collectively the “Executive Orders”) exceeded presidential authority under IEEPA, and permanently enjoining the Executive Branch from imposing these tariffs. That same week, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia granted a preliminary injunction to two small educational toy companies, holding that the IEEPA does not permit the tariffs imposed under the Executive Orders.
On August 29, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed, in part, the CIT’s ruling. The Supreme Court consolidated and agreed to review the U.S. Court of Appeals and U.S. District Court decisions. Oral arguments took place on November 5, 2025.
Importer Action Required
While the Supreme Court has now held that tariffs imposed by the president under IEEPA are invalid, the majority was silent on potential billions of dollars in refunds and next steps for importers who foot the costs of these improperly imposed tariffs. The dissent acknowledged that the refund process was likely to “be a mess.” While it is possible Customs and Border Protection (CBP) will automatically re-liquidate and refund the IEEPA tariffs imposed, importers and those who directly paid such tariffs should take action now to request a refund of all unlawfully collected duties, with interest:
- Post Summary Corrections (PSCs) – For entries not yet liquidated (or entries reliquidated by CBP, if applicable), importers can file post-summary corrections. (PSCs) to correct duty rates before liquidation. This mechanism allows CBP to recalculate the applicable duty without the unlawful IEEPA tariff and issue a refund of any overpayment. PSCs are generally the fastest and least contentious way to recover overpayments on unliquidated entries.
- Protests – For entries already liquidated, importers must file a protest under 19 U.S.C. § 1514 within 180 days of liquidation. Failure to meet this deadline can bar recovery unless a court specifically orders reliquidation.
- Judicial Relief – If CBP denies or delays refunds, importers can bring actions in the CIT under 28 U.S.C. § 1581 to compel refunds.
Companies should act promptly to preserve refund rights.
Our team will continue to track these tariff refund developments. Please contact your regular Lathrop GPM attorney with questions about this decision’s impact on your business.