3/2/26 — Federal Circuit Orders Immediate Issuance of Mandate in IEEPA Tariff Case

On Monday, March 2, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit granted the importers' motion for immediate issuance of the mandates in V.O.S. Selections, Inc. v. Trump, Nos. 25-1812, 25-1813, and denied the government's cross-motion to stay the mandates. The en banc court dissolved the stay it had entered on August 29, 2025, and ordered the mandates to issue forthwith.

The order is a sharp rebuke of DOJ's position. Just three days earlier, the government had asked the court to wait for the Supreme Court to send down its judgment under Rule 45.3 and then hold the mandate for an additional 90 days to give the political branches time to "consider options." DOJ had characterized the importers' request as proceeding at "breakneck speed" and dismissed their interest in beginning refund proceedings as a desire to be the "center of attention" at the Court of International Trade. The full court disagreed, acting swiftly and unanimously (with Circuit Judge Newman not participating) to clear the path for refund litigation to begin.

With the mandates now issued, jurisdiction returns to the Court of International Trade, where proceedings on IEEPA tariff refunds can move forward. The government's separate request for a 120-day pause on refund litigation at the CIT (with plaintiffs' opposition due March 17, 2026) remains pending, but today's order significantly undercuts DOJ's delay strategy.

The CIT will now need to determine the scope of relief—including whether refunds extend only to the named plaintiffs or to the broader universe of importers who paid the unlawful duties. The plaintiffs have already filed a motion at the CIT seeking a permanent injunction against enforcement of the IEEPA tariffs and an order directing Customs and Border Protection to begin issuing refunds with interest.

Several critical questions remain for the CIT to resolve on remand. First, the Federal Circuit's original August 2025 decision vacated the CIT's universal injunction in light of the Supreme Court's guidance in Trump v. CASA, Inc. on the proper scope of injunctive relief. The CIT must now fashion new injunctive relief consistent with both the Supreme Court's merits ruling and its injunction jurisprudence. Second, the mechanics of refunding billions in tariff collections will require detailed administrative orders directed at CBP. Third, the government is likely to resist broad relief at every turn, as evidenced by its attempts to delay proceedings both at the Federal Circuit and now at the CIT.

For importers, today's order is a clear signal that the refund process is moving forward despite the government's resistance. Importers who paid IEEPA tariffs may wish to consider immediately filing a lawsuit, as the ability to file such a lawsuit could soon end.