| Key Points: – Feb. 20 Supreme Court Opinion Day could impact Trump IEEPA tariffs. – Learning Resources v. Trump tests whether IEEPA authorizes broad import duties. – Outcomes range from upholding tariffs to narrowing or striking them with remedies. |
The U.S. Supreme Court’s next scheduled Opinion Day on Feb. 20 is a key marker for the challenge to President Trump’s global tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The case, Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, could determine whether emergency economic powers extend to imposing broad import duties.
Opinion Day means the Court may release decisions without advance notice of which cases will be included, and no ruling is guaranteed. As reported by Bloomberg, Feb. 20 is the first opinion release after a recess, heightening focus on the tariff challenge (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-02-13/supreme-court-schedules-opinions-on-feb-20-as-tariff-case-looms).
At issue is whether IEEPA’s emergency authorities allow tariffs, or whether tariffs must rest on traditional trade statutes like Section 232 (national security) or Section 301 (unfair trade). Potential outcomes range from upholding IEEPA tariffs, to narrowing their scope, to striking them with remedies that affect both future collections and limited retroactive relief.
If the Court narrows or invalidates the IEEPA tariffs, near-term implications would likely center on duty accruals, supplier pricing, and contract terms while remedies are implemented. Companies have been modeling scenarios for prospective rate changes and documenting entries in case refund processes are later defined.
Trump tariffs Supreme Court ruling dates: Feb. 20, 24, 25
For businesses awaiting a decision, the next three chances for a ruling are Feb. 20, Feb. 24, and Feb. 25, as reported by the Wall Street Journal (https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/cpi-inflation-data-stock-market-02-13-2026/card/supreme-court-s-next-chances-to-rule-on-trump-s-tariffs-feb-20-24-and-25-xFSV2vA7yiOoCFdGoCb8). The Court can issue opinions on any of these dates without advance case-specific notice.
There is no assurance the tariff case will appear on any particular date. Timing will depend on the justices’ resolution of both the merits and the appropriate remedy.
At argument, several justices probed whether IEEPA’s text supports tariff powers, contrasting it with Sections 232 and 301. “Several justices were skeptical that IEEPA’s phrase ‘regulate importation’ actually covers the power to impose tariffs,” said Gregory Husisian, a trade law partner, in his analysis of the hearing (https://www.foley.com/news/2025/11/husisian-breaks-down-scotus-tariff-case-arguments/).
Separately, President Trump has indicated he could maintain tariffs through other avenues if the IEEPA duties are struck, as reported by MSN (https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/trump-says-he-ll-figure-something-out-if-tariffs-are-struck-down-as-supreme-court-ruling-may-come-next-week/ar-AA1W5mGG). That underscores the distinction between emergency powers and longstanding trade tools.
Tariff refunds eligibility and business steps after a decision
Who could claim refunds and how amounts may be set
If the Court rejects some or all IEEPA tariff collections, refund eligibility could be limited and may focus on importers of record, with scope and process set by the courts and agencies. According to Fox Business, estimates of potential refunds vary widely, and analysts emphasize that courts would still need to determine who qualifies and on what basis (https://www.foxbusiness.com/media/us-trade-official-warns-up-200b-hangs-balance-scotus-weighs-trump-tariff-case).
Refund amounts, if available, would likely track entered value, the specific duty rate paid, and the time period and products covered by any remedy. The Court could also remand for further proceedings, which would shape calculations and timelines.
Immediate changes if tariffs are struck down or narrowed
A ruling striking or narrowing IEEPA tariffs would most likely change rates prospectively while any stay, transition, or remand is implemented. The administration could consider using other trade authorities, such as Sections 232 or 301, which follow distinct statutory procedures.
Operationally, companies have been preparing documentation of entries, evaluating contract and surcharge language, and updating accrual and pricing frameworks for multiple outcomes. Communications with customers and suppliers have been framed around conditional timelines, given the Court may define narrow, staged, or plaintiff-specific remedies.
Disclaimer:
The information provided on AiCryptoCore.com is for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or trading advice. Cryptocurrency investments involve risk and may result in financial loss. Always conduct your own research and consult with a qualified financial advisor before making any investment decisions.
