Original Section 301 Tariffs on Imports from China Will Stand
Source
American Shipper
Post Date
06/17/2026
After years of litigation, the Supreme Court has officially closed the door on a challenge to President Trump? first-term imposition of Section 301 tariffs on hundreds of billions of dollars?worth of imports from China. This case, which opposed the expansion of the initial China Section 301 tariffs to so-called List 3 and 4A goods, was first filed in 2020 and subsequently joined by thousands of importers. After a March 2023 ruling by the Court of International Trade it was taken up by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which issued in September 2025 a decision that (1) deemed satisfactory the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative? explanation of how its expansion of the tariffs complied with statutory notice and comment procedures (while affirming that this expansion was a reviewable agency action and not an unreviewable presidential act), (2) relied on a statutory provision allowing Section 301 tariffs to be modified (up or down) when the prior action is ?o longer appropriate?(thereby declining to limit the circumstances or extent of such modifications), and (3) rejected the plaintiffs?major questions doctrine argument by concluding that Congress clearly delegated authority to USTR under the applicable law to impose and modify tariffs. The Supreme Court? decision not to review the CAFC ruling means the Section 301 tariffs on List 3 and 4A goods from China will continue to be imposed and there will be no refunds of such tariffs levied in the past. In the meantime, the second Trump administration has announced plans to take a number of other Section 301 tariff actions against a broad range of products and countries. The finality of the China tariff litigation has no practical effect on those actions, but it could strengthen the administration? conviction that it has authority to modify any tariffs that may be imposed in those proceedings whenever and however much it wants in pursuit of its stated objectives. In that respect the Supreme Court? decision may have ed the door to even more tariff volatility in the months and years ahead.
