Gone quiet · last update Sep 29, 2026 / Donald Trump

The court fight over Trump's emergency tariffs and the Supreme Court's ruling

Overview · reviewed October 24, 2026

Businesses and states have challenged President Donald Trump's sweeping in court since April 2025, arguing that the emergency law he used did not let him impose them. In February 2026 the Supreme Court agreed, ruling 6-3 that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not authorize tariffs, and by the end of July the government had refunded about $100 billion to importers.[1][2] Trump replaced the struck-down duties with tariffs under other laws, first a temporary global tariff and then, in July 2026, tariffs on 60 trading partners, and those are being challenged in court as well.[3][4][5]

Read the timeline

Follow this story to see new developments when you return.

Trump replaced the struck-down duties with tariffs under other laws, first a temporary global tariff and then, in July 2026, tariffs on 60 trading partners, and those are being challenged in court as well.[3][4][5]

Coverage over time

Share of tracked outlets · weekly (UTC)

Week of 2025-04-14 (UTC): 18%, 36 of 201 tracked outlets (10 left, 16 center, 10 right)Week of 2025-04-21 (UTC): 17%, 36 of 206 tracked outlets (14 left, 20 center, 2 right)Week of 2025-04-28 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-05-05 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-05-12 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-05-19 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-05-26 (UTC): 40%, 77 of 191 tracked outlets (21 left, 40 center, 16 right)Week of 2025-06-02 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-06-09 (UTC): 9%, 18 of 199 tracked outlets (5 left, 8 center, 5 right)Week of 2025-06-16 (UTC): 9%, 11 of 118 tracked outlets (4 left, 5 center, 2 right)Week of 2025-06-23 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-06-30 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-07-07 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-07-14 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-07-21 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-07-28 (UTC): 9%, 17 of 187 tracked outlets (5 left, 10 center, 2 right)Week of 2025-08-04 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-08-11 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-08-18 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-08-25 (UTC): 25%, 49 of 199 tracked outlets (12 left, 23 center, 14 right)Week of 2025-09-01 (UTC): 21%, 38 of 177 tracked outlets (10 left, 21 center, 7 right)Week of 2025-09-08 (UTC): 14%, 29 of 214 tracked outlets (6 left, 15 center, 8 right)Week of 2025-09-15 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-09-22 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-09-29 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-10-06 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-10-13 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-10-20 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-10-27 (UTC): 7%, 12 of 174 tracked outlets (7 left, 3 center, 2 right)Week of 2025-11-03 (UTC): 32%, 67 of 209 tracked outlets (21 left, 28 center, 18 right)Week of 2025-11-10 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-11-17 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-11-24 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-12-01 (UTC): 23%, 41 of 177 tracked outlets (14 left, 19 center, 8 right)Week of 2025-12-08 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-12-15 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-12-22 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-12-29 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-01-05 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-01-12 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-01-19 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-01-26 (UTC): 4%, 8 of 189 tracked outlets (3 left, 3 center, 2 right)Week of 2026-02-02 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-02-09 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-02-16 (UTC): 54%, 97 of 178 tracked outlets (33 left, 41 center, 23 right)Week of 2026-02-23 (UTC): 26%, 48 of 186 tracked outlets (13 left, 21 center, 14 right)Week of 2026-03-02 (UTC): 21%, 37 of 175 tracked outlets (11 left, 17 center, 9 right)Week of 2026-03-09 (UTC): 3%, 5 of 166 tracked outlets (2 left, 0 center, 3 right)Week of 2026-03-16 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-03-23 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-03-30 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-04-06 (UTC): 3%, 4 of 154 tracked outlets (2 left, 0 center, 2 right)Week of 2026-04-13 (UTC): 3%, 4 of 156 tracked outlets (2 left, 1 center, 1 right)Week of 2026-04-20 (UTC): 15%, 24 of 157 tracked outlets (11 left, 8 center, 5 right)Week of 2026-04-27 (UTC): 4%, 7 of 160 tracked outlets (1 left, 2 center, 4 right)Week of 2026-05-04 (UTC): 18%, 31 of 175 tracked outlets (11 left, 15 center, 5 right)Week of 2026-05-11 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-05-18 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-05-25 (UTC): 6%, 11 of 185 tracked outlets (2 left, 6 center, 3 right)Week of 2026-06-01 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-06-08 (UTC): 1%, 2 of 200 tracked outlets (2 left, 0 center, 0 right)Week of 2026-06-15 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-06-22 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-06-29 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-07-06 (UTC): 1%, 5 of 560 tracked outlets (2 left, 1 center, 2 right)Week of 2026-07-13 (UTC): 3%, 16 of 559 tracked outlets (9 left, 5 center, 2 right)Week of 2026-07-20 (UTC): 16%, 88 of 562 tracked outlets (27 left, 42 center, 19 right)Week of 2026-07-27 (UTC): 2%, 14 of 561 tracked outlets (7 left, 4 center, 3 right)Week of 2026-08-03 (UTC): 10%, 56 of 537 tracked outlets (17 left, 29 center, 10 right)Week of 2026-08-10 (UTC): 3%, 16 of 545 tracked outlets (4 left, 7 center, 5 right)Week of 2026-08-17 (UTC): 8%, 35 of 464 tracked outlets (9 left, 23 center, 3 right)Week of 2026-08-24 (UTC): under 1%, 1 of 466 tracked outlets (1 left, 0 center, 0 right)Week of 2026-08-31 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-09-07 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-09-14 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-09-21 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-09-28 (UTC): 3%, 14 of 476 tracked outlets (2 left, 10 center, 2 right)Week of 2026-10-05 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-10-12 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-10-19 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-10-26 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-11-02 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-11-09 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outlets, so far

LeftCenterRightLighter bar: this week so far

Each bar is the share of the outlets on our Left / Center / Right rating scale that we tracked publishing that week which carried reporting on this story, split by the outlets' ratings. We track more outlets now than in the archive, so a share keeps earlier and later weeks comparable. An outlet counts once a week however much it published, and outlets in one ownership or syndication group count as one on each side they appear on. A rating describes the outlet, not the report. A gap means no such reports were collected that week, not that nothing was reported anywhere. Weeks run Monday to Sunday in UTC, so a report published on a Sunday evening in US Eastern time counts in the next week. 15 more outlets off the scale (not rated, or outside the left-right graphs) also reported; they are not in this chart. See them.

Weekly counts, outlets and reports (33 weeks with coverage)
Outlets on the rating scale that carried this story each week, of the outlets tracked that week, newest first
Week of (UTC)LeftCenterRightOf trackedShareReceipts
Sep 28, 2026210214 of 4763%
Aug 24, 20261001 of 466under 1%
Aug 17, 2026923335 of 4648%
Aug 10, 202647516 of 5453%
Aug 3, 202617291056 of 53710%
Jul 27, 202674314 of 5612%
Jul 20, 202627421988 of 56216%
Jul 13, 202695216 of 5593%
Jul 6, 20262125 of 5601%
Jun 8, 20262002 of 2001%
May 25, 202626311 of 1856%
May 4, 20261115531 of 17518%
Apr 27, 20261247 of 1604%
Apr 20, 2026118524 of 15715%
Apr 13, 20262114 of 1563%
Apr 6, 20262024 of 1543%
Mar 9, 20262035 of 1663%
Mar 2, 20261117937 of 17521%
Feb 23, 202613211448 of 18626%
Feb 16, 202633412397 of 17854%
Jan 26, 20263328 of 1894%
Dec 1, 20251419841 of 17723%
Nov 3, 202521281867 of 20932%
Oct 27, 202573212 of 1747%
Sep 8, 2025615829 of 21414%
Sep 1, 20251021738 of 17721%
Aug 25, 202512231449 of 19925%
Jul 28, 2025510217 of 1879%
Jun 16, 202545211 of 1189%
Jun 9, 202558518 of 1999%
May 26, 202521401677 of 19140%
Apr 21, 20251420236 of 20617%
Apr 14, 202510161036 of 20118%

Latest coverage

The newest reporting in this story's record.

  1. Sep 29, 2026 · first reported · Headline from KION Central Coast

    Trump’s tariffs are back in court — again

Background

The challenges targeted Trump's use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, a 1977 law meant for emergencies, to impose his "Liberation Day" tariffs.[6][7] In April 2025, five small businesses sued, arguing that trade deficits are not an emergency,[8] California sued,[9] and a dozen states with Democratic leaders filed suit in the U.S. Court of International Trade.[10] On May 28, a three-judge panel of that court ruled unanimously that Trump had overstepped his authority,[11][6] but an appeals court paused the ruling and in June let the tariffs stay in effect while it heard the case.[12][13] Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said the tariffs were "not going away."[14]

Read the full background (4 more paragraphs)

The case moved quickly to the Supreme Court. Two family-owned toy companies asked the justices to step in in June,[15] and after hearing arguments at the end of July,[16] the appeals court ruled on August 29 that most of the tariffs were illegal but left them in place for now.[17] The administration asked the Supreme Court to reverse the ruling,[18] and in September the court agreed to hear the case on a fast track, raising the prospect of refunds for importers.[7][19] At arguments in November, a majority of the justices sounded skeptical of the tariffs,[20] and Trump warned that a loss would leave the country "defenseless."[21] Costco was among the companies that sued to preserve their right to refunds.[22]

On February 20, 2026, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that the emergency law does not authorize the president to impose tariffs.[23][1] Trump called the ruling a "disgrace"[1] and announced a temporary 10% global tariff for 150 days under the Trade Act of 1974, keeping other tariffs in place, then said he would raise it to 15%.[24][3] Stocks fell after the increase.[25] In his State of the Union address, Trump called the decision unfortunate.[26] Two dozen states sued over the new global tariff,[27] and in May a split panel of the Court of International Trade ruled against it.[28]

The ruling opened the way for refunds of tariffs already paid, estimated at about $175 billion.[29] FedEx sued for a full refund and said it would return the money to the customers who paid,[30][29] and a federal judge ruled in March that companies were entitled to refunds.[31] Customs opened a refund portal in April[32] for an estimated $166 billion owed to more than 330,000 importers.[33] Refunds reached about $100 billion by the end of July[2] and helped push the June federal budget deficit to $120 billion.[34] The administration fought a trade judge's order to refund every importer that paid, including those that had not sued.[35][36] Large companies reported big refunds, including $2.9 billion for Walmart, which said it would fund price cuts, and $994 million for Target.[37][38] Most businesses were not passing refunds on to consumers,[39] though shippers such as FedEx and UPS began crediting customers who had paid tariffs on imported packages,[40] and Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker demanded direct payments to families.[41]

The administration also set out to replace about $1.6 trillion in tariff revenue lost to the ruling.[42] As the temporary global tariff expired in July, it imposed tariffs of 10% and 12.5% on goods from 60 trading partners, including the European Union, over what it called lax enforcement of bans on imports made with forced labor.[4] Critics said the tariffs were less about forced labor than a way to replace the struck-down duties,[43] Australia's trade minister called them "completely unjustified,"[4] and an outside analysis found that they replaced less than 60% of the lost revenue.[44] Small businesses sued within a day,[44] 25 Democratic-led states followed in August,[45] and at the end of September a three-judge panel of the Court of International Trade heard their argument that the duties, covering 99.4% of U.S. imports, exceed the president's authority.[5] Trump's other second-term tariffs are followed in a separate arc.

Supporting stories (45)
  1. Supreme Court rules Trump's tariffs violated federal law
  2. Will you get any tariff money back? Here's what to know about the refund checks to major US companies
  3. Donald Trump’s new 10% global tariff comes into effect
  4. Trump’s new tariffs dodge Congress
  5. Trump’s tariffs are back in court — again
  6. Trump’s ‘Liberation Day’ Tariffs Struck Down In Court
  7. Supreme Court says it will hear Trump appeal on tariffs in key economic case
  8. U.S. businesses sue to block Trump tariffs, say trade deficits are not an emergency
  9. California will sue to stop Trump from imposing sweeping tariffs:
  10. A dozen states sue the Trump administration to stop tariff policy
  11. Stock market futures jump after court halts most Trump's tariffs
  12. Appeals court halts ruling Trump didn’t have authority on tariffs
  13. Trump tariffs may remain in effect while appeals proceed, federal appeals court rules
  14. Trump advisers defend tariffs amid legal fight, insisting they're ‘not going away'
  15. American toy companies bring Trump’s tariffs to the Supreme Court
  16. Trump's tariffs face crucial court test on eve of latest deadline
  17. Appeals court finds Trump’s sweeping tariffs unconstitutional but leaves them in place for now
  18. Trump asks Supreme Court to quickly take up tariffs case and reverse ruling finding them illegal
  19. Here's who would get refunds if Trump's tariffs get thrown out
  20. Court appears dubious of Trump’s tariffs
  21. Trump has other tariff options if the Supreme Court strikes down his worldwide import taxes
  22. Costco sues the Trump administration over tariffs
  23. Supreme Court Tariffs
  24. President Trump wants to impose a 15% tariff, up from 10% he announced after Supreme Court decision
  25. Stocks drop after Trump ramps up his tariffs
  26. Trump avoids tariffs confrontation with Supreme Court justices at State of the Union
  27. 2 dozen states sue Trump over his latest round of global tariffs
  28. Federal court rules against new global tariffs Trump imposed after loss at the Supreme Court
  29. FedEx sues Trump administration for tariff refunds, says it will give money back to customers
  30. FedEx sues Trump administration for "full refund" of tariff payments
  31. Judge rules companies entitled to refunds for Trump tariffs overturned by SCOTUS
  32. Businesses can claim refunds starting Monday for Trump tariffs declared unconstitutional
  33. $166 billion tariff refunds: Consumers ‘might have a claim’ to their share
  34. Tariff refunds push US June budget deficit to $120 billion
  35. Trump plans to appeal order allowing all importers that paid struck-down tariffs to seek refunds
  36. Government fights trade judge’s order for tariff refunds to all importers
  37. Here's how Walmart is using $2.9B in tariff refunds
  38. Target’s comeback quarter: New merchandise, more shoppers and a $994M tariff refund
  39. Tariffs raised prices you paid. But most businesses won’t be passing tariffs refunds back to you
  40. A surprise credit after an overseas purchase: The tariff refunds now flowing through shippers
  41. Pritzker pens letter to Trump, seeking tariff refunds for Illinois families
  42. Trump seeks to close $1.6 trillion revenue gap with raft of new tariffs
  43. A forced-labor crackdown or an end-run around Congress? Dissecting Trump's new tariffs
  44. Small businesses launch new Trump tariff challenge
  45. 25 states sue over Trump's new tariffs, calling them 'pretext' to replace his old ones

The full record

Each date is when an update was first reported.

All 56 recorded updates

September 2026

  1. Trump’s tariffs are back in court — againHeadline from KION Central Coast · 14 outlets

July 2026

  1. Amazon to pass on some of its $600 million tariff refunds to customersHeadline from Seattle Times · 11 outlets
  2. A forced-labor crackdown or an end-run around Congress? Dissecting Trump's new tariffsHeadline from NBC 5 Dallas-Fort Worth · 15 outlets
  3. Small businesses launch new Trump tariff challengeHeadline from Axios · 23 outlets
  4. Trump’s new tariffs dodge CongressHeadline from The Columbian · 78 outlets
  5. Customers ‘not entitled’ to tariff refunds, Nintendo saysHeadline from NJ.com / Star-Ledger · 10 outlets
  6. Trump administration races the clock to rebuild US tariff wall knocked down by Supreme CourtHeadline from Daily Journal · 13 outlets
  7. Tariff refunds push US June budget deficit to $120 billionHeadline from Hawaiitribune Herald · 4 outlets
  8. South Africa seeks tariff exemption as US probes forced labor tied to importsHeadline from Philadelphia Inquirer · 5 outlets

June 2026

  1. Tariff refunds for small businesses past due, US Senate Dems tell Trump administrationHeadline from North Dakota Monitor · 1 outlet

March 2026

  1. Trump seeks to close $1.6 trillion revenue gap with raft of new tariffsHeadline from Winchester Star · 5 outlets

Coverage & sources

Read the reports, see how much was collected over time, or compare outlets by political leaning.

Coverage & sources →