Trump Tariff Class-Action Lawsuits: What Businesses Need to Know

Several class-action lawsuits have been filed challenging President Trump’s tariffs as unlawful under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), following a February 2026 supreme court ruling striking them down. These legal challenges, brought by organizations including the New Civil Liberties Alliance and the Liberty Justice Center, seek refunds for businesses that paid tariffs they argue were imposed without proper congressional authorization.

The Supreme Court’s rebuke of Trump’s IEEPA use creates legal uncertainties but upholds congressional purse powers, with analysts noting potential broader implications for other Trump policies, according to Brookings Institution experts.

What Lawsuits Have Been Filed Against Trump Tariffs

Multiple organizations have filed class-action lawsuits on behalf of businesses affected by the tariffs.

The New Civil Liberties Alliance filed a class-action suit on behalf of importers including Smirk & Dagger Games, a game company that paid tariffs on imported products. NCLA President Mark Chenoweth stated that the organization stands ready to ensure everyone can obtain relief as soon as possible.

The Liberty Justice Center filed V.O.S. Selections, Inc. v. Trump on behalf of small businesses including V.O.S. Selections and FishUSA. According to Jeffrey Schwab, Director of Litigation at the Liberty Justice Center, the Supreme Court has already ruled that the President cannot unilaterally impose worldwide tariffs, and it is not a general license for the President to tax the American people.

A coalition of more than 20 state attorneys general also sued over post-ruling tariffs under Section 122, calling them illegal taxes on Americans. New York Attorney General Letitia James argued they violate separation of powers, while Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes stated the Supreme Court already ruled Trump lacks unilateral authority.

Supreme Court Ruling Strikes Down Tariffs as Unlawful

The February 2026 Supreme Court ruling determined that the tariffs were unlawful under IEEPA, finding that the president cannot use emergency powers to impose tariffs without congressional approval. Experts from the Peterson Institute praised the ruling for rejecting IEEPA as a tariff statute under the nondelegation doctrine.

Brookings Institution experts noted the ruling represents a comprehensive repudiation of executive overreach on trade policy, emphasizing Congress’s exclusive authority over tariffs under Article I, Section 8. Heather Hurlburt of Chatham House called it a comprehensive repudiation, though she warned that Trump retains other tariff options and the ruling leaves refund questions unresolved.

Legal Pathways for Businesses to Seek Refunds and Injunctions

Businesses affected by the tariffs may have several legal options to seek relief. The class-action lawsuits currently pending aim to secure refunds for businesses that paid tariffs under the now-struck-down policy. These cases argue that since the Supreme Court has ruled the tariffs unlawful, businesses should not bear the financial burden of complying with an unconstitutional order.

Organizations leading these efforts include the NCLA and Liberty Justice Center, both of which have announced they are accepting plaintiff participants. Small businesses like V.O.S. Selections and FishUSA have joined as plaintiffs to test the legal theory that businesses harmed by unlawful tariffs deserve compensation.

The state attorneys general coalition has focused on post-ruling tariffs implemented under Section 122, arguing these also constitute illegal taxes on Americans. This parallel track seeks to prevent future tariff implementations that bypass congressional authority.

Experts note that refund implementation remains complex, as the ruling addressed the legality of the tariffs but did not specify mechanisms for compensation. Businesses seeking to participate in class-action litigation should consult with legal counsel about ongoing cases and potential deadlines for inclusion.