Susman Godfrey LLP is uniquely positioned to lead tariff refund litigation. Our firm brings elite trial capabilities and a proven record of success in complex, high-stakes disputes, including against the federal government. Our team includes:
- Justin A. Nelson. Justin is a partner and sits on the firm’s executive committee. Justin is one of the nation’s elite trial lawyers and legal strategists. He was nominated for Litigator of the Year by The American Lawyer, has been recognized as a Leading Lawyer by Lawdragon, and is recognized by one of America’s top lawyers by Forbes. Justin has been appointed to leadership roles in major cases—including serving as co-lead counsel representing copyright owners against Anthropic, which recently settled in “historic” fashion. Justin also leads the Susman Godfrey team pursuing tax refunds against the Government in employee retention tax credit cases, and has spoken widely on these and other high-profile legal issues.
- Weston O’Black. Weston is a partner and is widely recognized for his skill in handling and trying bet-the-company cases. He has been featured as a Litigator of the Week by The American Lawyer and recognized by Benchmark Litigation, The Legal 500, and Super Lawyers. His wins helped Susman Godrey secure recognition by Benchmark Litigation as Texas Law Firm of the Year in 2023. Weston has successfully resolved numerous lawsuits seeking tax refunds against the Government.
We are ready to help importers pursue refunds through legal action. We are trial lawyers—all our partners and associates have clerked on United States Federal Courts. We routinely handle many of the highest-stakes cases in the nation.
I. Background on IEEPA Tariffs
Beginning in February 2025, President Donald J. Trump issued a series of executive orders that imposed a broad set of tariffs on imported goods under the guise of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (“IEEPA”) of 1977. Since February 2025, importers have paid an estimated $175 billion in additional duties because of the IEEPA tariffs according to news outlets.
IEPPA authorizes the President to “investigate, regulate, or prohibit” certain transactions after declaring a national emergency based on an “unusual and extraordinary threat” to the country’s security or economy. President Trump was the first President to use IEEPA to impose tariffs on imported goods.
The 2025 IEEPA tariffs applied across wide categories of imports, including consumer goods, industrial inputs, and agricultural products from countries that are major trading partners. These tariffs generally imposed an additional tax of 10% on goods from virtually all trading partners and imposed higher, country-specific tariffs, including on goods from Mexico, Canada, and China.
II. The Supreme Court Invalidated the IEEPA Tariffs
On February 20, 2026, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the President lacked authority to impose the 2025 tariffs under IEEPA. See Learning Res., Inc. v. Trump, 607 U.S. ___ (Feb. 20, 2026). The Supreme Court’s decision renders the sweeping IEEPA tariffs unlawful from their inception in February 2025.
The Court held that the IEEPA grants the President authority to “investigate, regulate, or prohibit” importation of property in response to a declared national emergency. 50 U.S.C. § 1702(a)(1)(B). But as the Supreme Court explained, that language does not encompass the power to levy tariffs—i.e., taxes on imports—absent clear congressional authorization. Congress has long treated the imposition of tariffs as a matter requiring specific and express statutory delegation, and nothing in IEEPA refers to “tariffs.” The Supreme Court also stated that reading IEEPA to authorize sweeping tariffs would raise separation-of-powers concerns because the Constitution grants to Congress the power to “lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises.” U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 1. Congress did not use IEEPA to expressly delegate to the President a general power to impose tariffs.
Despite questions at oral argument, the Court’s majority opinion does not address refunds. Justice Kavanaugh’s dissent mentions refunds, noting that the United States may be required to refund the money and the process is likely to be a “mess.”
III. The Administration’s Response to the Supreme Court’s Decision
There is uncertainty about how and when the government will refund the unlawful IEEPA tariffs that importers paid to the CBP. News agencies have reported that administration officials are “devising strategies that would let the president keep some – or maybe even most – of the revenue” from the IEEPA tariffs.[1] President Trump predicted the process for companies seeking refunds would require a battle in court: “We’ll end up being in court for the next five years.”[2] U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent stated that refunds are “not up to the administration, it is up to the lower court, let’s just be clear on that.”[3]
Many small businesses and major corporations have filed lawsuits at the CIT to preserve their rights to a refund
IV. Susman Godfrey Can Help
Susman Godfrey can lead your CIT lawsuit. Please contact Justin Nelson (jnelson@susmangodfrey.com) or Weston O’Black (woblack@susmangodfrey.com) if you have any questions.
[1] Megan Messerly, Trump’s Next Tariff Fight: Keeping the Money, Politico (Feb. 26, 2026), https://www.politico.com/news/2026/02/26/trumps-next-tariff-fight-keeping-the-money-00799774.
[2] David Thomas, Law firms gird for tariff refund fight after Supreme Court ruling, Reuters (Feb. 20, 2026), https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/law-firms-gird-tariff-refund-fight-after-supreme-court-ruling-2026-02-20/.
[3] Tara Suter, Bessent dodges questions about tariff refunds, The Hill, Feb. 20, 2026, https://thehill.com/business/5749731-bessent-trump-tariffs-refunds.
