Trending Now - Court Rulings Prompt States to Challenge Trump's Tariff Policies
WHO:
President Donald Trump
Judge Richard Eaton, appointed by Bill Clinton
Justice Brett Kavanaugh, Supreme Court Justice
Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield
Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent
Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB)
Attorneys General from 24 states including New York, Oregon, California, and Arizona
WHAT:
A federal judge ordered the government to begin refunding $130 billion in tariffs that were recently invalidated by the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in February 2026 that Trump's use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs was unauthorized.
Trump imposed new 10% tariffs under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, with plans to increase them to 15%.
A lawsuit was filed by 24 state attorneys general to block Trump's new tariffs, arguing he lacks the authority to impose them.
The CRFB projected a loss of $1.7 trillion in tariff revenue through 2036 due to the Supreme Court ruling, potentially increasing the national debt to $58 trillion.
WHERE:
U.S. Court of International Trade, Manhattan, New York
Locations of the suing states: New York, Oregon, California, Arizona, and others
WHEN:
The Supreme Court ruling occurred in February 2026.
The lawsuit against Trump’s new tariffs was filed on March 5, 2026.
Judge Eaton's order for refunds was issued on March 4, 2026.
The CRFB report was released on March 3, 2026.
WHY:
The Supreme Court ruling invalidated Trump's tariffs imposed under IEEPA, leading to the need for refunds.
The state attorneys general argue that Trump is overstepping his authority with the new tariffs, which they claim are an exercise of unrestrained executive power.
Trump claims the tariffs are necessary to address trade deficits and boost domestic manufacturing.
HOW:
The refund process will begin with U.S. Customs and Border Protection calculating what importers would have paid without the invalidated tariffs.
The lawsuit argues that Section 122 was intended for specific circumstances and not for broad import taxes.
The CRFB analysis indicates that the Section 122 tariff at 10% would generate approximately $35 billion over its 150-day window, while a 15% rate would generate about $50 billion.
A federal judge has ordered the government to start refunding $130 billion in tariffs that were recently invalidated by the Supreme Court, which ruled six to three in February that Trump’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose those tariffs was unauthorized. The lawsuit, filed by 24 state attorneys general on March 5, argues that Trump is overstepping his authority with new tariffs, which he claims are necessary to address trade deficits and boost domestic manufacturing. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget has projected that the Supreme Court ruling could lead to a loss of $1.7 trillion in tariff revenue through 2036, potentially increasing the national debt to $58 trillion.