So the Supreme Court just threw out President Donald Trump's signature emergency-law tariffs. That's the good news for importers who've been paying them. The bad news? The court didn't bother to explain how the government should give back the $133 billion it already collected. It's like a judge ruling you were overcharged at a restaurant but leaving you to argue with the manager about the refund.

The justices said the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act doesn't give presidents the power to tax imports. That's a pretty clear legal line. What's not clear is what happens next for the companies that paid up. And while they're figuring that out, Trump signaled over the weekend he's not backing down—he's talking about a new 15% worldwide tariff, framing it as a fresh move after attacking the court's ruling.

How Do You Give Back $133 Billion?

This is where it gets messy. U.S. Customs and Border Protection has a system for correcting duty overpayments, and some lawyers think they could just adapt that framework. Others expect a chaotic patchwork involving the Court of International Trade in New York and a bunch of additional lower-court rulings. It's the legal equivalent of untangling a giant ball of yarn.

Smart importers didn't wait around. Major players like Costco (COST), Revlon, and Bumble Bee Foods filed lawsuits seeking refunds before the Supreme Court even ruled, basically preserving their spot in the refund line. Lawyers are also bracing for follow-on disputes—imagine manufacturers trying to claw back part of a refund because their suppliers raised input prices to cover the tariff costs. It's a refund ripple effect.

The tension here is pretty stark. On one side, you have the court imposing limits. On the other, Trump is pushing forward. Public opinion seems to be leaning toward the court. A YouGov poll found 60% of Americans backed the Supreme Court's move, and 66% said they've noticed prices rising for goods. That includes 88% of Democrats and 68% of independents. People are feeling the pinch.

Trump has argued, of course, that tariffs improve U.S. trade outcomes. He even pointed to what he described as a sharp trade-deficit improvement after the tariffs rolled out in April 2025. The problem? Official data later showed the deficit was actually up 95% by November 2025. So there's a bit of a disconnect between the story and the numbers.

The Ruling and The Roadmap

The Supreme Court decision was 6-3, with Chief Justice John Roberts in the majority. It marked a clear rejection of Trump's attempt to impose broad, double-digit levies on most countries. Interestingly, two of the three justices Trump appointed sided with the majority. Even his own picks weren't buying the argument.

While everyone's wondering about refunds, Trump is already looking for workarounds. He's pointing to other legal tools, like Section 122 of the Trade Expansion Act, which could allow for a temporary global tariff lasting up to 150 days. He also said his administration would spend the next few months setting new tariff schedules he views as legally defensible. The game isn't over; he's just switching plays.

Trade lawyers generally expect importers to eventually get paid back, but not quickly. The bill is so large—$133 billion—that it could strain the system. Analysts at TD Securities have estimated a 12-to-18-month timeline for refunds to actually reach companies. So, get comfortable.

Public Sentiment and The Political Fallout

This ruling lines up with what a lot of people are feeling. That same YouGov poll revealed that 74% of respondents blame Trump's tariffs for the surge in inflation. With 66% of Americans noting increased prices for goods, this discontent isn't just an economic issue—it's a political one that could shape the upcoming midterms and how Republican candidates talk about the economy.

The Supreme Court's decision, coming after Trump's claims of a trade deficit reduction that were later contradicted by data, really underscores the gap between the narrative and the reality. Public opinion is shifting, and it highlights the challenges Trump faces as he tries to implement new tariffs without going through Congress.

Who Actually Pays? (Hint: It's Probably You)

Here's the kicker for regular people: you're probably not getting a check. Consumers are unlikely to see direct refunds tied to these tariffs because higher shelf prices are hard to trace back to a specific duty line. Economists and trade analysts estimate that close to 90% of tariff costs are borne domestically by U.S. companies and shoppers, not by overseas exporters. So we've been paying for this.

States are trying to do something about it, though. Illinois Governor JB Pritzker is seeking money for 5.11 million households, and Nevada Treasurer Zach Conine is requesting $2.1 billion. Conine put it bluntly: "As Nevada's chief investment officer, I have a responsibility to try to recoup every single dollar that the Trump Administration takes from Nevada families."

So, to recap: The tariffs are gone, legally speaking. Getting the money back will be a long, complicated slog. The public mostly thinks they caused price hikes. And the guy who imposed them is already planning his next tariff move. It's a classic Washington story—a big decision that solves one problem and immediately creates several new ones.