If you’re an importer trying to recover IEEPA tariffs, there’s a good chance you’ve heard the letters “CIT” come up in conversation. The Court of International Trade is the federal court that handles customs and trade disputes in the United States. It’s where the IEEPA tariff fight has played out, and it’s where many importers may end up if their refund claims need judicial resolution.
You probably won’t need to step foot in a courtroom. But understanding what the CIT is, how it works, and when it becomes relevant to your refund helps you make better decisions about your recovery strategy.
What the Court of International Trade Does
The CIT is one of the specialized federal courts in the United States. While most people are familiar with the district courts (where criminal trials happen) and the Supreme Court (which gets all the headlines), there are also courts built to handle specific types of cases. The CIT handles trade and customs cases — and only trade and customs cases.
Exclusive Jurisdiction
The CIT has exclusive jurisdiction over civil actions arising from customs and trade laws. This means if you have a legal dispute with CBP about how your duties were assessed, you can’t take it to your local federal district court. You go to the CIT. Period.
The court’s jurisdiction is defined in 28 U.S.C. Section 1581 and covers:
| Subsection | Type of Case | Relevance to IEEPA |
|---|---|---|
| 1581(a) | Protest denials | Primary path for denied IEEPA protests |
| 1581(b) | Domestic industry petitions | Not directly relevant |
| 1581(c) | AD/CVD cases | Not directly relevant |
| 1581(i) | Residual jurisdiction | Key path for IEEPA challenges outside protest window |
For IEEPA purposes, two subsections matter most: 1581(a) for importers whose CBP protests were denied, and 1581(i) for broader constitutional challenges to the tariffs themselves.
Where It Sits in the Federal System
The CIT is equivalent in rank to a federal district court. Its decisions can be appealed to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC), and from there to the Supreme Court. This is the exact path the IEEPA tariff challenge took:
- CIT — initial rulings on IEEPA tariff legality
- Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit — appeal of CIT decisions
- Supreme Court — final ruling in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump striking down IEEPA tariffs
The Supreme Court’s ruling is now binding on all lower courts, including the CIT. This means any IEEPA refund case that reaches the CIT should be decided in the importer’s favor, because the highest court has already resolved the underlying legal question.
A Brief History
The CIT was established in its current form by the Customs Courts Act of 1980. Before that, customs disputes were handled by the U.S. Customs Court, which had existed since 1926. And before that, the Board of General Appraisers handled customs cases going back to 1890.
The court is physically located in New York City — One Federal Plaza in lower Manhattan — reflecting New York’s historic role as the center of U.S. international trade. However, the CIT can and does hold proceedings anywhere in the country, and many cases are decided on the papers (motions and briefs) without in-person hearings.
The Judges
The CIT has nine judges, appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate for life terms. No more than five judges can be from the same political party. The court also has senior judges (semi-retired judges who still hear cases) and can designate judges from other federal courts when needed.
CIT judges are specialists. Unlike district court judges who might handle everything from drug cases to patent disputes to personal injury lawsuits, CIT judges spend their entire careers on trade and customs law. They know the HTS inside and out. They understand how import duties are calculated. They’re familiar with CBP procedures. This specialization means decisions tend to be technically sophisticated and well-grounded in trade law.
When the CIT Becomes Relevant to Your IEEPA Refund
For most importers, the IEEPA refund process won’t involve the CIT directly. If your entries are unliquidated, a Post-Summary Correction handles it. If your entries are liquidated within the 180-day window, a CBP protest handles it. The CIT becomes relevant in two scenarios.
Scenario 1: Your Protest Was Denied
If you filed a CBP protest challenging the IEEPA duties on your entries and CBP denied it, you have 180 days from the denial date to file a civil action at the CIT under 28 U.S.C. Section 1581(a). This is the traditional “appeal” path for protest denials.
Given the Supreme Court’s ruling, a straight denial of an IEEPA protest on the merits would be unusual. But denials can happen for procedural reasons — the protest was filed late, didn’t include required information, or covered entries that don’t actually include IEEPA codes. If your protest was denied, understanding why is the first step in deciding whether to pursue CIT action.
Some importers also use “accelerated disposition” to speed up the protest process. If CBP doesn’t act on your protest within 30 days of an accelerated disposition request, the protest is deemed denied — which then opens the CIT path. This is a deliberate strategy, not a failure. It lets you move your case to a court that may process it faster than CBP’s administrative backlog allows.
Scenario 2: The Protest Window Has Closed
If your entries were liquidated more than 180 days ago and you never filed a protest, you can still pursue recovery through the CIT under Section 1581(i) — the “residual jurisdiction” provision. This path is for cases where the normal administrative remedies (protests) aren’t available.
The statute of limitations for Section 1581(i) actions is two years from the date of the challenged government action. The specific “trigger date” can be complex — it might be the date of liquidation, the date of the executive order, or another date depending on the legal theory. Trade counsel can advise on the specific limitations period for your entries.
This path requires a trade attorney admitted to the CIT bar. It’s more complex and expensive than the protest route, but it’s the only option for entries where the protest window has expired.
Get your free Impact Assessment →
How CIT Proceedings Work
If you do end up at the CIT, here’s what the process looks like.
Filing the Summons
A CIT case begins with a summons (not a complaint, as in most federal courts). The summons must be filed within the applicable limitations period and served on the appropriate government parties (typically the Attorney General and the local U.S. Attorney).
After the summons, you file a complaint laying out the facts and legal arguments. For IEEPA cases, the complaint would cite the Supreme Court’s ruling, identify the specific entries at issue, and request refund of the IEEPA duties plus interest.
The Government’s Response
The government (represented by the Department of Justice’s International Trade Field Office) files an answer to the complaint. In straightforward IEEPA cases where the Supreme Court has already decided the underlying legal question, the government may not vigorously contest the case. But that doesn’t mean it’s automatic — the government may raise procedural defenses, challenge the calculation of damages, or dispute specific entries.
Discovery and Motions
CIT cases can involve discovery (exchange of documents and information between the parties), depositions, and pre-trial motions. However, many trade cases are resolved on summary judgment — meaning the court decides based on the legal arguments and documentary record without a trial.
For IEEPA refund cases, summary judgment is the likely resolution path. The legal question is settled (the Supreme Court already ruled). The factual questions are primarily documentary (did this entry include IEEPA codes, and how much was paid?). There’s not much to try in a courtroom.
Trial (If Needed)
CIT trials are bench trials — decided by a judge, not a jury. They’re typically shorter and more focused than trials in other federal courts, given the technical nature of the subject matter. For IEEPA cases, a trial would be unusual unless there are disputed facts about specific entries.
The Judgment and Enforcement
If the court rules in your favor (which is expected for valid IEEPA claims), it enters a judgment ordering CBP to refund the IEEPA duties plus applicable interest. CBP is then legally obligated to process the refund. Court-ordered refunds carry the weight of a federal judgment, which generally moves faster through CBP’s system than administrative refunds.
The CIT’s Role in the Broader IEEPA Story
The CIT didn’t just rule on individual refund claims — it played a central role in the legal challenge that led to the Supreme Court’s IEEPA ruling.
The Original Challenges
Multiple lawsuits challenging the IEEPA tariffs were filed at the CIT beginning shortly after the executive orders were issued in early 2025. These cases argued that IEEPA doesn’t authorize tariffs — it’s an emergency powers statute designed for sanctions and asset freezes, not trade regulation.
The CIT initially issued mixed rulings, with different judges reaching different conclusions about IEEPA’s scope. This “circuit split” (though within a single court) accelerated the case’s path to the Supreme Court.
The Universal Refund Order
After the Supreme Court’s ruling, the CIT issued a universal order directing CBP to process refunds for all affected entries — not just the entries in the specific case that went to the Supreme Court. This universal order is significant because it covers all importers who paid IEEPA tariffs, whether or not they were parties to the lawsuit.
The CIT’s universal order is the legal foundation for the entire refund program. When your customs broker files a protest or PSC citing the Supreme Court ruling, they’re relying on the CIT’s order for enforcement authority.
Ongoing Supervision
The CIT retains jurisdiction to supervise CBP’s compliance with the refund order. If CBP drags its feet, importers (or their counsel) can ask the CIT to enforce compliance. This judicial oversight is a meaningful check on CBP’s processing timeline — it’s harder for the government to indefinitely delay refunds when a federal court is watching.
CIT vs. Other Courts: Why You Can’t Go Somewhere Else
You might wonder: why can’t I just sue CBP in my local federal court? The answer is jurisdictional. Congress gave the CIT exclusive jurisdiction over customs disputes, and other federal courts are prohibited from hearing these cases.
This has practical implications:
- Geography: The CIT is in New York, but your attorney doesn’t need to be in New York. Cases are often handled entirely through written filings, and the court holds sessions in other cities when needed.
- Specialized bar: Attorneys must be admitted to the CIT bar to practice before the court. Not all attorneys (even experienced ones) have this admission. If you need CIT representation, make sure your attorney is CIT-admitted.
- Different rules: The CIT has its own rules of procedure (largely based on the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, but with modifications for trade cases). Your attorney needs to know these rules.
Understanding how the U.S. import tariff system works provides context for why a specialized court exists at all. Trade law is technical enough that Congress decided it needed judges who do nothing else.
Cost, Timeline, and Practical Considerations
CIT litigation is real litigation. It’s not a form you fill out and submit. Here’s what to expect in practical terms.
Attorney Fees
CIT attorneys typically work on either an hourly basis or a contingency basis (percentage of the recovery). For straightforward IEEPA refund cases, some attorneys are offering contingency arrangements because the legal merits are clear and the question is mainly about documentation and procedure.
Hourly rates for experienced CIT attorneys range from $300 to $800+ per hour. Total fees depend on the complexity of your case — a simple case with clean documentation might cost $10,000-$30,000, while a complex case with hundreds of entries and disputed facts could cost significantly more.
Timeline
CIT cases typically take 12 to 24 months from filing to judgment, though this varies widely. IEEPA cases may move faster because the legal question is settled and the court is actively managing the refund process.
Factors that affect your timeline:
- How contested the case is — if the government doesn’t vigorously oppose, faster
- The complexity of your entries — hundreds of entries take longer than ten
- The court’s docket — the CIT is handling many IEEPA cases simultaneously
- Whether issues arise — classification disputes, documentation gaps, or procedural questions can add time
When CIT Litigation Makes Sense
CIT litigation makes the most strategic sense when:
- Your 180-day protest window has closed on high-value entries
- CBP denied your protest and you disagree with the denial
- You want to use accelerated disposition to move faster than CBP’s administrative process
- Your total IEEPA exposure justifies the legal costs
For smaller claims, the immediate capital path may be more practical than CIT litigation. You get paid now and let the buyer handle any necessary legal proceedings.
What This Means for Your Recovery Strategy
The CIT is the backstop of the IEEPA recovery process. Most importers won’t need it — PSCs and protests will handle the majority of claims. But knowing the CIT is there, and understanding how it works, gives you confidence that your recovery rights are protected even if the administrative process hits obstacles.
Here’s how to think about the CIT in your overall strategy:
- First, maximize PSCs for unliquidated entries (fastest, cheapest)
- Second, file protests for liquidated entries within the 180-day window
- Third, consider CIT action for entries outside the protest window or if CBP denies protests
- Fourth, evaluate immediate capital as an alternative to waiting for any government-path resolution
The IEEPA tariff refund glossary defines every legal term you’ll encounter during the recovery process, including CIT-specific terminology. And the eligibility guide helps you determine which of your entries fall into which recovery path.
If you’re not sure whether you need CIT action, start with an Impact Assessment. It maps every entry’s status — unliquidated, liquidated within window, liquidated outside window — and recommends the right recovery path for each one. You’ll know exactly which entries (if any) need court involvement.
Request a free Impact Assessment to get a complete picture of your IEEPA tariff exposure and recovery options. The assessment is confidential, covered by mutual NDA, and delivered within 5-10 business days.
