The Federal Circuit stayed the CIT's May 7 order voiding the 10% Section 122 tariff, keeping CBP collections intact for most importers until the appeal resolves.
Five days after the U.S. Court of International Trade struck down the Trump administration's 10% universal tariff imposed under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued an administrative stay on May 12, 2026, suspending enforcement of the CIT's permanent injunction while the government's appeal moves forward [1]. The stay restores, for most importers, the legal status quo that existed before the CIT ruling and signals that the Federal Circuit intends to give the government's arguments a full hearing before allowing refund obligations to take effect [2].
The underlying CIT decision, issued May 7, 2026, invalidated the surcharge as an unlawful exercise of executive authority [1]. The plaintiffs in that action were Burlap & Barrel, a specialty spice importer, Basic Fun, a toy company, and the State of Washington [1]. The government appealed to the Federal Circuit, which responded with the administrative stay within days [2]. An administrative stay of this kind is a temporary, procedural measure, distinct from a merits-based preliminary injunction, and it preserves the appellate court's ability to act before any irreversible harm occurs.
The practical effect is significant for the import community. U.S. Customs and Border Protection will continue collecting the 10% surcharge from all importers except the three named plaintiffs during the pendency of the appeal [1]. That carve-out means most importers receive no immediate relief from the CIT's ruling and cannot assume refunds are forthcoming [2]. The tariffs contain a self-executing expiration provision, set to terminate on July 24, 2026, regardless of how the Federal Circuit rules [1]. That deadline compresses the window for affected parties considerably.
Trade counsel are now advising importers to take protective steps before the July 24 expiration renders any claim moot [1]. Practitioners are specifically directing clients to file protests with CBP or initiate their own actions at the CIT to preserve refund rights on duties paid during the stay period [2]. Failure to act before expiration could foreclose any recovery even if the Federal Circuit ultimately affirms the CIT's invalidation of the tariff [1]. The appellate proceedings will test the limits of presidential emergency trade authority and the evidentiary standards required to invoke Section 122, questions with broad implications for future administrations [2].