Government lawyers argue that a judge from the Court of International Trade exceeded his authority. The judge ordered the U.S. Customs and Border Patrol to refund tariffs deemed illegal in February to all companies, even those not involved in the lawsuit. An appeal was filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The opening brief was submitted on Monday.
The government referenced a Supreme Court case from June 2025 concerning birthright citizenship. The ruling in the case limited universal injunctions, which apply a decision universally, not just to the parties involved. However, Judge Richard Eaton, managing the tariff lawsuits, believes these limits do not apply here. The government disagrees. “The CIT’s universal injunctions, requiring the government to refund IEEPA duties for all importers (including non-party importers), cannot possibly be squared with CASA,” the government stated in its brief.
Most tariff refunds have been processed. The CBP has already certified $100 billion in refunds. The concern lies with companies whose tariffs were finalized during customs processes. According to a Congressional rule, the CBP cannot reprocess tariffs if the administrative refund process is no longer available. Those companies are encouraged to file lawsuits to reclaim their funds.
“The Court of International Trade has already issued numerous orders in cases from importers seeking relief,” explained government lawyers. “Importers who have not yet filed such cases can still do so within the statute of limitations.”
Barry Appleton, a law professor and co-director at New York Law School’s Center for International Law, noted that the government’s argument seems legally stronger. Yet, he expressed concern that smaller businesses might be disadvantaged. “The government took this money under a law the Supreme Court said never authorized tariffs. Recovery should not depend on whether a business could afford to sue,” he stated. “Refunding an unlawful tariff should not be a reward for litigating. Smaller companies may not even realize they need to sue within a deadline they never knew about.”