The U.S. Department of Justice is approaching its first major legal deadline following a recent ruling by the Supreme Court of the United States that determined tariffs issued under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) were unlawful.
By Friday, the DOJ is required to respond to a request involving one of the earliest cases seeking expedited tariff refunds through the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT), the court that typically oversees tariff-related disputes.
Trade attorneys told CNBC that more than 2,000 cases have been filed at the CIT by companies seeking tariff refunds. In December, the CIT placed these cases on hold pending the Supreme Court’s decision.
Following the ruling, one plaintiff, V.O.S., filed a motion to move its case—previously pending in federal appeals court—back to the CIT for a refund determination. A federal district court has directed the DOJ to respond by February 27 regarding whether the case may proceed at the CIT. As of Thursday afternoon, no filing had been made, and the department declined to comment.
The Supreme Court provided the federal court system with 32 days to determine next procedural steps after its ruling.
Although the current motion involves a specific group of small businesses, the plaintiffs argue that the outcome may have broader legal implications. In their filing, they stated that prompt court action could facilitate timely refunds for other companies pursuing similar IEEPA tariff challenges and that the refund process established in this case could serve as a model for others.
Trade attorneys and customs specialists estimate that approximately 300,000 importers paid the tariffs in question. Some projections suggest potential refunds could total up to $175 billion. Additional companies have filed cases following the ruling, including a lawsuit submitted last week by FedEx.
The DOJ’s response may provide further clarity on how the administration intends to approach the refund process. At a recent press conference, President Donald Trump indicated that resolving the matter could take years through litigation. Meanwhile, several lawmakers have called for a clearer plan regarding repayment. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in a recent interview that the litigation process could extend for years before any payout is finalized.
In their motion, the plaintiffs are requesting that the government issue administrative orders necessary to formally invalidate the IEEPA tariffs and ensure prompt refunds with interest. While the filing suggests the plaintiffs do not expect opposition, it notes that recent public statements from the administration indicate court-ordered relief may be required to guarantee timely compliance.
Legal experts emphasize that while the Supreme Court’s decision did not outline a specific refund mechanism, affected importers are entitled to repayment. Pratik A. Shah, lead attorney in a related Supreme Court case and head of the Supreme Court practice at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, stated that the key issue now centers on the process by which refunds will be distributed.
#SupplyChainNews #TradePolicy #TariffUpdate #GlobalTrade #BusinessNews
