US Government Seeks Delay in Tariff Refund Litigation Following Supreme Court Ruling

Delay Requested in Tariff Refund Proceedings

The federal government has approached a federal appeals court to request a pause in the ongoing tariff refund litigation. This request comes shortly after the Supreme Court invalidated former President Donald Trump’s extensive global tariff policy. In a recent filing with the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the administration has asked for a delay of up to four months before the refund litigation can continue in the US Court of International Trade.

This request is made as importers gear up to claim potentially substantial refunds following the Supreme Court's decision. The government noted that the Supreme Court usually issues its judgment 32 days after a case is reviewed. Additionally, they have asked for a further 90-day extension, emphasizing the need for political branches to evaluate their options in light of the ruling.

The filing highlighted the complexity of the situation, advocating for a careful approach rather than a rushed process, indicating concerns about the potential scale and administrative challenges of refund claims.

Last week, the Supreme Court ruled 6–3 that Trump had overstepped his authority by imposing broad global tariffs without explicit approval from Congress. Chief Justice John Roberts stated that the Constitution does not grant the executive branch the power to impose taxes unilaterally, reaffirming that such authority lies with Congress.

This ruling significantly undermines one of Trump’s key economic strategies and allows companies to seek refunds that could amount to hundreds of billions of dollars. In response, Trump criticized the ruling on Truth Social, warning that it could lead to substantial payouts to foreign nations and corporations he claims have taken advantage of the US. He also raised the possibility of a rehearing or reconsideration of the case.

The legal conflict traces back to last August when the Federal Circuit deemed many of Trump’s tariffs unlawful but sent the refund issue back to the Court of International Trade. The implementation of that decision was halted while Trump appealed to the Supreme Court. It is important to note that the court's ruling does not impact sector-specific tariffs on products like steel and automobiles.

Shortly after the Supreme Court's decision, Trump invoked a different statutory authority to impose a new 10% tariff on imports, which he later raised to 15%, indicating that trade policy remains a contentious issue despite the judicial setback. As the focus shifts to refund claims, the administration's request for a delay suggests that the financial and political ramifications of the ruling are still unresolved.