Litigation Attorney Ashley Akers Comments on Supreme Court Tariff Ruling, Refunds

Litigation attorney Ashley Akers was quoted in multiple news outlets following the U.S. Supreme Court's decision invalidating tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The court ruled on February 20, 2026, that IEEPA did not grant President Donald Trump the authority to impose these measures, finding the statute lacked explicit language mentioning tariffs or revenue-related terms and that an exception to the major questions doctrine – the principle that Congress must authorize delegations of authority involving issues of major economic or political significance – did not apply. Ms. Akers highlighted for Bloomberg Law the implications of the court's analysis of the major questions doctrine for future policy initiatives by the administration.

"The administration justifies a lot of frankly unprecedented actions the president takes on emergency bases or foreign implications or trade implications," she said. "So, this is at least a signal in the major questions realm that the court's not going to be so broad in its interpretation of executive authority."

In the aftermath of the decision come questions about refunds for the importers who have paid approximately $175 billion in fees. Hundreds of companies have already filed lawsuits in the U.S. Court of International Trade to preserve refund eligibility, according to Ms. Akers, but how the refund process works remains to be seen. She outlined multiple scenarios for The News & Observer: U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) could create a new streamlined online process, or it could direct businesses to use existing mechanisms to correct tariff payments by submitting post-payment corrections or protests.

Read in Bloomberg Law: Tariffs Ruling Splits Court's Conservatives Over Major Questions

Read in The News & Observer: Will You Get a Tariff Refund After the Supreme Court Ruling?