24 States Sue Over New Tariffs as Border Agency Delays Court-Ordered Refunds

2026-03-06

The BareStory

A coalition of 24 states filed a lawsuit on Thursday against the Trump administration over newly implemented global tariffs. This legal action coincides with a separate development on Friday, when U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) informed a federal court that it cannot immediately issue court-ordered refunds for previous tariffs recently struck down by the Supreme Court.

The states' lawsuit targets a new 10 percent import duty enacted under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. The coalition of state attorneys general and governors claims the administration exceeded its legal authority and violated the constitutional separation of powers. White House spokesperson Kush Desai stated the administration will defend the tariffs in court, arguing the president is appropriately utilizing congressional authority to address balance-of-payments deficits.

These new tariffs follow a February Supreme Court decision that invalidated earlier emergency import duties. Following the high court's ruling, a U.S. Court of International Trade judge ordered the government on Wednesday to refund the struck-down tariffs with interest to affected businesses.

In a Friday court filing, CBP stated that current technological, procedural, and manpower limitations prevent immediate compliance with the refund mandate. The agency reported that it had collected approximately $166 billion from the invalidated duties. To process the claims efficiently without diverting personnel from security operations, CBP proposed updating its automated systems. The agency estimates the necessary system upgrades will take 45 days, suggesting that refund processing could begin by late April.

Left Perspective

Checking Unilateral Executive Power
Demanding Strict Judicial Accountability
Shielding the Constitutional Framework

Right Perspective

Asserting National Economic Sovereignty
Prioritizing Continuous Security Operations
Preserving Stable Institutional Functions

Left Perspective

• Checking Unilateral Executive Power The coalition of 24 states views the new 10 percent import duty as a direct violation of the constitutional separation of powers. This camp prioritizes government accountability, framing the administration's use of Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 as an illegitimate workaround to impose taxes without congressional approval. For reformers, challenging this action is essential to maintaining institutional firewalls and preventing the executive branch from unilaterally extracting wealth from the public economy.

• Demanding Strict Judicial Accountability Customs and Border Protection's (CBP) inability to immediately refund the $166 billion is interpreted as bureaucratic stonewalling rather than a mere logistical hurdle. Because the Supreme Court already invalidated the previous emergency duties, this perspective insists that the government must urgently return unlawfully collected funds to affected businesses. Tolerating a 45-day delay allows the state to hoard private capital while insulating itself from the immediate consequences of its own illegal overreach.

• Shielding the Constitutional Framework The ultimate risk perceived here is the systemic erosion of democratic checks and balances. By imposing a new wave of tariffs immediately after the Supreme Court struck down the previous ones, the administration appears to be treating the judicial branch as an obstacle to bypass rather than an authority to respect. Reformers fear that permitting the government to endlessly pivot to new executive workarounds while delaying court-mandated refunds sets a dangerous precedent for unchecked executive impunity.

Right Perspective

• Asserting National Economic Sovereignty The administration's 10 percent tariff is viewed as a necessary and lawful utilization of existing congressional authority to protect the nation's financial standing. This camp prioritizes national sovereignty and views Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 as a vital tool specifically designed to address severe balance-of-payments deficits. From this realist perspective, executive action is a crucial mechanism for defending the domestic economy against global trade imbalances that threaten long-term national stability.

• Prioritizing Continuous Security Operations The CBP’s request for a 45-day delay to update automated systems is seen as an act of pragmatic governance and institutional responsibility. Traditionalists prioritize the rule of law and civic order, recognizing that diverting critical personnel away from border security to manually process $166 billion in refunds would endanger the nation. Committing to a late April timeline ensures the court order is respected without sacrificing the agency's primary mandate to protect the homeland.

• Preserving Stable Institutional Functions The prevailing fear for this camp is the threat of judicial and state-level micromanagement crippling federal operational capacity. Forcing an immediate, logistically impossible payout risks system failure and administrative chaos within federal agencies. Traditionalists warn that when 24 states and lower courts demand instantaneous compliance blind to manpower and technological limitations, they undermine the continuous, orderly functioning of the federal government required to maintain systemic stability.

How it may affect me

As a U.S. reader:

• In the short term, the newly implemented 10 percent import duty will directly impact the domestic economy, acting either as a protective measure against global trade imbalances or as an added cost that extracts wealth from the public market.

• Affected businesses will face a short-term delay in recovering their share of the $166 billion in invalidated tariffs, keeping private capital withheld until Customs and Border Protection updates its automated systems by late April.

• Federal border security operations will maintain their current staffing in the short term, as the 45-day system update prevents critical personnel from being diverted to manually process the business refunds.

• In the long term, the lawsuit filed by the 24 states will establish a legal precedent regarding the separation of powers and whether the executive branch can unilaterally impose trade duties without direct congressional approval.

24 States Sue Over New Tariffs as Border Agency Delays Court-Ordered Refunds

The BareStory

Left Perspective

Right Perspective

How it may affect me

Read the story at