About Tariff Litigation Journal

Tariff Litigation Journal was founded in February 2026, in the week following the Supreme Court's decision in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump. The publication's purpose is simple: to provide importers, counsel, and the broader trade community with clear, professionally edited coverage of the refund docket that decision set in motion. The docket is large. The procedural rules are technical. The stakes, for the 330,000-plus importers who paid under the unlawful IEEPA regime, are material. Clear editorial coverage, we believe, serves an underserved readership.

The publication is editorially independent. It does not take retainer or advisory fees from law firms it covers. It maintains a disclosed commercial relationship with Commerce Justice Alliance, described in the disclosure section below, that does not involve editorial participation by the marketplace or by any participating law firm.

Editorial Standards

Our editorial standards are straightforward and have been consistent since launch.

Sourcing. Every substantive claim of fact in our coverage is sourced either to a court record, a published government document, a statutory provision, or an on-the-record statement from an identified source. Where we rely on background conversations with practitioners or government personnel, we say so in the article and do not treat the resulting characterization as on-the-record sourcing.

Corrections. Factual errors are corrected promptly and noted at the bottom of the affected article. Material corrections — those that alter the substantive meaning of a reported claim — are additionally flagged in a separate corrections page. We do not retroactively edit articles without marking the change.

Attribution. Statutory citations are given in full (title, section, subsection as applicable). Court cases are cited by short case name on first mention and by short citation thereafter. Administrative guidance is cited by CBP publication number where applicable.

Editorial separation. No law firm, legal marketplace, or advertiser has editorial input on our coverage. Article topics are selected by the editorial desk based on docket significance, reader interest, and timeliness. Participating firms on Commerce Justice Alliance do not receive favorable treatment in our coverage and are not named in our articles absent independent newsworthiness.

Scope. We cover the IEEPA refund docket, the CBP administrative refund process, related CIT litigation, the Tariff Refund Act of 2026 and related pending legislation, the consumer class action front, and practitioner-facing procedural developments. We do not cover tariff policy advocacy, and we do not publish opinion pieces on whether tariffs should or should not be imposed as a matter of trade policy. We cover what the law requires and what the courts have held.

Relationship with Commerce Justice Alliance

Tariff Litigation Journal and Commerce Justice Alliance are separate entities with a disclosed commercial relationship. Commerce Justice Alliance is a B2B marketplace that matches importers with CIT-qualified counsel. It is not a law firm and does not provide legal services. Tariff Litigation Journal operates intake on its behalf; importers submitting through our intake page are routed to Commerce Justice Alliance for eligibility screening and attorney matching.

Commerce Justice Alliance does not have editorial input on our articles. It does not review or approve drafts. It does not influence which firms are covered in our reporting or how they are characterized. Our coverage of the refund docket would exist, in substantially the same form, whether or not the intake partnership existed; the partnership reflects our editorial view that readers deserve a clear path from information to action, and that a marketplace structure is the cleanest way to provide that path without editorial conflict.

The publication is not compensated on a per-intake or per-match basis. The commercial arrangement is a flat editorial sponsorship that does not vary with intake volume.

Contact

For editorial matters — story tips, factual corrections, or on-the-record statements — contact the editorial desk at editor@tarifflitigation.claims.

For intake questions, eligibility screening, or attorney matching, the intake page at intake.html routes to Commerce Justice Alliance. Editorial staff do not provide individualized legal or procedural advice and cannot evaluate specific refund claims.

For press inquiries, contact press@tarifflitigation.claims.

For participation inquiries from law firms interested in Commerce Justice Alliance, visit commercejusticealliance.com directly. Editorial staff are not involved in marketplace onboarding.

Legal Disclaimer

Tariff Litigation Journal is an editorial publication and is not a law firm. Nothing on this site constitutes legal advice, creates an attorney-client relationship, or should be relied upon as a substitute for consultation with qualified counsel admitted in the relevant jurisdiction. Articles on this site discuss the IEEPA refund docket at a general level and may not address specific facts, jurisdictional considerations, or procedural requirements applicable to any particular reader's situation.

Intake submitted through this site is routed to Commerce Justice Alliance, a marketplace that connects importers with independent counsel. Commerce Justice Alliance is likewise not a law firm. The attorneys matched through the marketplace are independent practitioners whose admission, fee structure, and professional qualifications are disclosed to the importer before any engagement is entered. Commerce Justice Alliance does not practice law, does not hold client funds, and does not direct the professional judgment of participating counsel.

Statutory citations and court case references in our articles are drawn from public sources and are accurate to the best of our knowledge at the time of publication. Readers should independently verify current statutory text, regulatory text, and case status before taking action. The law, and particularly the emerging procedural law of tariff refunds, is developing rapidly.

Past results do not guarantee future outcomes. The fact that the Supreme Court has held IEEPA tariffs unlawful, and that a refund regime is in place, does not mean that any particular importer's refund claim will succeed, that any particular amount will be recovered, or that any particular timeline will apply. Refund outcomes depend on the specific facts of each importer's entries, on procedural diligence in filing, and on the ongoing development of the docket.

The decision to retain counsel, whether through Commerce Justice Alliance or otherwise, is the reader's own. Tariff Litigation Journal does not recommend any specific law firm, does not rank participating firms, and does not evaluate the merits of any individual refund claim.