There are days in logistics when you check your phone before your first cup of coffee and realize the industry you went to bed in is not quite the same industry you woke up in. Today was one of those days.
This morning, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its ruling in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, striking down the tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) by a 6-3 vote. The Court held that IEEPA’s authorization to “regulate importation” does not include the authority to impose tariffs — and that when Congress wants to delegate tariff power to the executive branch, it says so explicitly with specific language, caps, and procedures. The IEEPA does none of that.
This is a significant legal development. And if you’re an importer who has been paying IEEPA tariffs, you likely have money on the table. Here’s what we know right now.
What the Court Actually Decided
The majority opinion, written by Chief Justice Roberts and joined by five other justices, rested on a straightforward point: “regulate” does not mean “tax.” The statute lists nine specific verbs authorizing presidential action — investigate, block, regulate, direct, compel, nullify, void, prevent, prohibit — and not one of them involves raising revenue. When Congress has delegated tariff authority in the past, through statutes like the Trade Act and the Trade Expansion Act, it used words like “duty,” “tariff,” and “surcharge,” and it set limits on how much and for how long.
IEEPA does none of that. So, the Court ruled, those tariffs were unlawfully imposed.
Three justices dissented, arguing that Congress had retained language in IEEPA that it knew had previously been used to authorize tariffs — and that overturning presidential reliance on that interpretation creates real-world complications. It’s a fair counterargument. But it didn’t carry the day.
What This Means for Importers
If your company paid IEEPA tariffs, you may be entitled to a refund. But there’s a catch — and it’s a time-sensitive one.
Under federal customs law (19 U.S.C. §1514), importers have 180 days from the liquidation of each entry to file a protest with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). Liquidation is the process by which CBP finalizes the duties owed on a specific shipment. Once that 180-day window closes and no protest has been filed, that entry is, in most cases, gone. You’ve waived your right to challenge it.
If you have not filed protective protests on your IEEPA tariff entries, your first call today should be to a licensed customs broker or trade attorney — not next week, today.
For entries where protests are already on file, the path forward runs through CBP and, ultimately, the Court of International Trade (CIT), which the Supreme Court confirmed holds exclusive jurisdiction over tariff challenges. There’s a reasonable possibility that CBP issues guidance allowing automatic grants on IEEPA-related protests, which would be the most efficient outcome — but that guidance hasn’t come yet. Watch for a CBP bulletin in the coming days.
The Mess the Court Acknowledged
The justices didn’t shy away from the complexity here. During oral argument, the potential refund situation was described plainly as a “mess” — and it is. IEEPA tariffs touched an enormous volume of goods across thousands of importers over an extended period. The CIT has handled large-scale situations like this before (the Section 301 China tariff litigation comes to mind), and it will likely establish consolidated proceedings to manage the volume. But that infrastructure takes time, and in the meantime, your individual protest rights are what protect your claim.
The ruling also leaves open the question of trade agreements and negotiations that were built around IEEPA tariff leverage. That’s a geopolitical complication that will take longer to sort out — and honestly, it’s above the pay grade of a drayage company to predict how it unfolds. What we can tell you is what it means for your supply chain in the near term.
What This Means for Your Landed Cost
Here’s where we bring it home.
Tariff changes — whether they go up, come down, or get struck down by the Supreme Court — are one of the most direct variables affecting your total landed cost. And landed cost is the number that actually matters. Not the line-haul rate. Not the per-container quote that wins the RFP. The real cost of getting your product from origin to final destination, with no surprises on the back end.
When tariff environments shift this suddenly, shippers who have transparent, predictable logistics costs on the drayage side are in a far better position to absorb or adapt to changes on the duty side. When you already know exactly what your drayage will cost — no hidden accessorials, no last-minute surcharges — you can model the impact of a tariff change clearly. When you don’t, you’re guessing on two variables at once.
That’s the case we’ve always made for working with a carrier who tells you what something actually costs before you agree to it.
What We’re Watching
The decision came down this morning, so the specific CBP protocols for refunds haven’t been announced yet. We’ll be tracking this closely and updating our customers as new guidance emerges. If you have questions about how this ruling might affect your import operations, reach out directly. We’d rather have that conversation now than after a protest window closes.
And if you’re not sure whether your current logistics setup gives you the visibility to make sense of moments like this one — that’s a conversation worth having too.
Mark-it Express provides international and domestic intermodal drayage services out of Chicago, Kansas City, and Detroit. We’re a bonded carrier with deep experience navigating shifting trade environments. If you have questions, you can reach us directly — no phone tree required.
