Court of International Trade Strikes Down Section 122 Tariffs — Ongoing Uncertainty Expected

The U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) has ruled that the Administration’s use of Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 to impose a 10% import surcharge was not lawful. In its May 7, 2026 decision, the CIT granted summary judgment in favor of private importer plaintiffs and the State of Washington.

While this is a significant development, it is not the final word on Section 122 tariffs.

What Happened

Section 122 allows the President to impose temporary import restrictions under specific balance-of-payments conditions.

• The CIT found the Administration’s justification did not meet this narrow standard

• The court concluded the authority granted under Section 122 was exceeded

• As a result, the duties were struck down for the parties involved in the case

Key Limitation: Not a Nationwide Decision

This ruling has a limited scope, which is critical for importers to understand.

• Relief applies only to the importer plaintiffs in the case

• The CIT declined to issue a nationwide injunction

• This means duty treatment, refunds, and obligations may still vary by importer

In short, this decision does not automatically change how Section 122 duties are applied across all entries.

What Happens Next

An appeal is highly likely given the importance of the tariff authority in question.

• The case may move to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

• It could ultimately reach the U.S. Supreme Court

• The Administration may also seek a stay of the decision while the appeal is pending

Until additional rulings or agency guidance are issued, importers should expect continued uncertainty.

What Importers Should Do Now

• 1. Monitor affected entries closely

  Track entries subject to Section 122 duties, including liquidation dates, duty payments, and any developments related to refunds. This will be critical if future relief becomes available.

• 2. Do not assume automatic refunds

  Because the ruling is limited in scope, broader refund eligibility may depend on future court decisions, actions by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), or importer-led actions such as protests or additional litigation.

• 3. Watch for CBP guidance

  CBP will likely issue operational instructions depending on how the decision progresses—whether it is affirmed, stayed, or modified on appeal.

• 4. Preserve protest rights

  Importers should carefully review liquidation timelines. The standard deadline to file a protest is generally 180 days from liquidation, and missing that window may limit the ability to recover duties.

• 5. Prepare for continued litigation

  This decision is a major development, but not a final resolution. Additional legal challenges and appellate review are expected.

Bottom Line

The CIT decision is a meaningful win for the importers involved and raises important questions about the limits of Section 122 authority. However, it remains a developing situation, not a closed case.

Importers should take a proactive approach—maintaining documentation, monitoring entries, and evaluating potential remedies on an entry-by-entry basis.

Juno Customs Solutions will continue to monitor litigation developments, CBP guidance, and any appeal activity related to Section 122 tariffs.