Trade Advisory: U.S. Court of International Trade Issues invalidated the Section 122 tariffs

Overview

On May 7, 2026, the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) issued a ruling (Slip Op. 26-47 | May 7, 2026| Context: IEEPA and Section 122 Authorities) in consolidated cases challenging U.S. tariff actions. The Court:

• Granted summary judgment and a permanent injunction for certain plaintiffs
• Dismissed numerous state claims for lack of standing
• Denied preliminary injunction requests as moot

Critical Takeaway — Limited, Plaintiff-Specific Relief

This ruling does NOT apply broadly to all importers.

The Court’s relief is expressly limited to specific plaintiffs, including:

• Burlap & Barrel, Inc.
• Basic Fun, Inc.
• The State of Washington

What this means:

• The decision only benefits those specific parties
• Tariffs are still in place for everyone else
• Other importers should continue paying duties as usual
• There is no automatic right to refunds for companies not involved in the case

Supporting Legal Findings

1. Standing Significantly Limits Scope: The Court dismissed claims from numerous states due to a lack of standing

• Implication:
  • Reinforces that only properly situated parties (primarily importers) can obtain relief
  • Prevents expansion of the ruling beyond those directly impacted

2. Final Merits Decision (Not Interim Relief): The Court issued a permanent injunction, not a preliminary ruling.

• Implication:
  • Represents a case-specific merits determination, not a policy-wide invalidation
  • Broader applicability—if any—will depend on appellate outcomes

Practical Considerations for Importers

Duty Exposure

• Importers not named in the case should assume:
  • The tariffs can continue to remain in place for all other importers besides the plaintiffs through July.
  • No automatic refund eligibility exists.

Strategic Considerations

• Evaluate:
  • Entry liquidation status
  • Protest deadlines and preservation strategies
  • Consider whether participation in litigation or protective actions is appropriate

What to Watch

• Appeals to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
• Potential clarification regarding:
  • Scope of relief
  • Applicability beyond named plaintiffs
• Any policy shift toward temporary tariff measures under Section 122

Bottom Line

The CIT’s ruling in Slip Op. 26-47 provides case-specific relief only and does not establish a universal suspension or refund of tariffs. Importers should proceed cautiously and await further clarity through the appellate process, particularly as alternative authorities such as Section 122 remain limited in scope.

Disclaimer

This advisory is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The content reflects a summary of a recent court decision based on publicly available information and should not be construed as a definitive interpretation of the ruling or its applicability to any specific facts or circumstances. Importers should consult with legal counsel before taking any action based on this information. No representation or warranty is made as to the completeness or accuracy of the information contained herein, and no liability is assumed for reliance on this advisory.

If the U.S. Court of International Trade’s ruling on Section 122 tariffs may impact your organization, our Trade Consulting team is available to support you. We can assist with importer‑specific impact assessments, duty exposure and liquidation reviews, protest and preservation strategies, litigation participation considerations, and monitoring of appellate and policy developments. Contact our Tariff Response Unit to discuss appropriate next steps based on your import profile.