On February 20, 2026, lead counsel for the plaintiff group in the test case for the China Section 301 tariff refund litigation (HMTX Industries LLC, et al. v. United States et al.), filed a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court seeking review of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) decision sustaining the China Section 301 tariffs under the Trade Act of 1974. See Thompson Hine Update of September 25, 2026, detailing the CAFC decision and holding that that the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) has the authority to modify its original Section 301 trade action by imposing and modifying tariffs with the addition of the List 3 and List 4A at a later date. Lead counsel for the plaintiff group has requested that the U.S. Supreme Court accept review of this decision and consider whether the USTR has “streamlined authority … to ‘modify’ an existing tariff” and allow “the agency essentially unlimited power to expand the scope of that initial action.”
Notably, the submission was filed on the same day that (1) the U.S. Supreme Court issued its ruling invalidating the Trump administration’s use of the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs and (2) the USTR announced that it would turn again to Section 301 to impose tariffs to address unjustifiable, unreasonable, discriminatory, and burdensome acts, policies, and practices by many trading partners. Indeed, the Petition for Writ of Certiorari states, “The need for immediate review is only underscored by this Administration’s repeated statements that it plans to rely more heavily on Section 301 … if this Court holds … that the President does not have the sweeping tariff power he claims under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.” With the IEEPA tariffs invalidated, counsel asserts that the issues surrounding interpretation of Section 301 will “become a (quickly) recurring one. This Court need not wait to step in.”