Lawyer who won US tariff case launches task force for refunds
Katyal, who successfully argued against the earlier tariff regime, has also questioned the legal footing of the administration’s proposed 15% global tariff, saying the US President cannot bypass Congress to impose such sweeping measures.
- Feb 23, 2026,
- Updated Feb 23, 2026 9:25 PM IST
Indian-American constitutional lawyer Neal Katyal on February 23 announced the launch of a legal task force to pursue refunds for businesses and importers affected by tariffs imposed under President Donald Trump, signalling a new phase of litigation following a landmark court ruling that curtailed the administration’s trade powers.
“We didn't specifically ask for refunds because our legal team saw it as a matter of course — if we win the case we do think refunds will come back,” Katyal said in a TV programme. “We are today launching a task force to fight for those refunds. We will fight tooth and nail for them if the federal government tries to hold that money back.”
The move comes days after the Supreme Court of the United States, in a 6-3 decision, struck down most of Trump’s earlier tariff actions, ruling that the administration had overstepped its authority and reaffirming that the power to levy taxes rests primarily with Congress. The judgment dealt a significant blow to a trade strategy that had reshaped global supply chains and strained ties with key partners.
Katyal, who successfully argued against the earlier tariff regime, has also questioned the legal footing of the administration’s proposed 15% global tariff, saying the US President cannot bypass Congress to impose such sweeping measures. If the policy is sound, he argued, it must be pursued through constitutional channels.
He further pointed to inconsistencies in the government’s legal reasoning, noting that the United States Department of Justice had previously told the Court that Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 was not designed to address trade deficits — the very rationale now being cited for the new tariffs.
The legal critique drew support from Gita Gopinath of the International Monetary Fund, who wrote on X that Katyal was “speaking International Economics 101,” suggesting the administration’s justification conflicts with basic macroeconomic distinctions.
Meanwhile, major US business groups are pressing Washington to quickly return the money already collected under the invalidated duties.
The National Retail Federation — whose members range from retail giants such as Walmart to small manufacturers — called for “a seamless process to refund the tariffs to US importers.”
The United States Chamber of Commerce has also demanded swift action, estimating that roughly $133 billion in tariffs covered by the ruling should be reimbursed. Its chief policy officer, Neil Bradley, said returning the funds would provide meaningful relief to more than 200,000 small-business importers and help support economic growth this year.
Indian-American constitutional lawyer Neal Katyal on February 23 announced the launch of a legal task force to pursue refunds for businesses and importers affected by tariffs imposed under President Donald Trump, signalling a new phase of litigation following a landmark court ruling that curtailed the administration’s trade powers.
“We didn't specifically ask for refunds because our legal team saw it as a matter of course — if we win the case we do think refunds will come back,” Katyal said in a TV programme. “We are today launching a task force to fight for those refunds. We will fight tooth and nail for them if the federal government tries to hold that money back.”
The move comes days after the Supreme Court of the United States, in a 6-3 decision, struck down most of Trump’s earlier tariff actions, ruling that the administration had overstepped its authority and reaffirming that the power to levy taxes rests primarily with Congress. The judgment dealt a significant blow to a trade strategy that had reshaped global supply chains and strained ties with key partners.
Katyal, who successfully argued against the earlier tariff regime, has also questioned the legal footing of the administration’s proposed 15% global tariff, saying the US President cannot bypass Congress to impose such sweeping measures. If the policy is sound, he argued, it must be pursued through constitutional channels.
He further pointed to inconsistencies in the government’s legal reasoning, noting that the United States Department of Justice had previously told the Court that Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 was not designed to address trade deficits — the very rationale now being cited for the new tariffs.
The legal critique drew support from Gita Gopinath of the International Monetary Fund, who wrote on X that Katyal was “speaking International Economics 101,” suggesting the administration’s justification conflicts with basic macroeconomic distinctions.
Meanwhile, major US business groups are pressing Washington to quickly return the money already collected under the invalidated duties.
The National Retail Federation — whose members range from retail giants such as Walmart to small manufacturers — called for “a seamless process to refund the tariffs to US importers.”
The United States Chamber of Commerce has also demanded swift action, estimating that roughly $133 billion in tariffs covered by the ruling should be reimbursed. Its chief policy officer, Neil Bradley, said returning the funds would provide meaningful relief to more than 200,000 small-business importers and help support economic growth this year.