What cases will the Supreme Court agree to hear before Jan 2027? — a case primarily related to tariffs imposed by Donald Trump

- [2025-09-09] The Supreme Court granted the government's petition for certiorari in Trump v. V.O.S. Selections and consolidated the case with Learning Resources — this is the IEEPA "reciprocal/trafficking tariffs" case. https://www.bradley.com/insights/publications/2026/02/what-importers-need-to-know-as-the-supreme-court-decides-the-fate-of-ieepa-tariffs - [2025-11-05] The Court set an expedited briefing schedule and held oral argument on November 5, 2025 , a nearly three-hour session. https://www.bradley.com/insights/publications/2026/02/what-importers-need-to-know-as-the-supreme-court-decides-the-fate-of-ieepa-tariffs - [2026-02-20] The Court decided the case 6-3: the Court held that IEEPA does not give the President authority to impose tariffs , in an opinion by Chief Justice Roberts. https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB11398 - This IEEPA cert grant and decision both occurred **before** the market's Feb 24, 2026 open date, so the original tariff case that reached SCOTUS is already fully resolved and off the docket — it cannot be the basis for a "grant before Jan 1 2027" event going forward. - [2026-02-24] Four days after the ruling, Trump invoked Section 122 to slap 10% tariffs on foreign goods , a new legal basis that immediately drew fresh litigation from states and importers. https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/20-states-sue-new-tariffs-trump-imposed-supreme-court-loss-rcna261964 - [2026-05-07] The CIT ruled that President Trump's 10% universal global tariff, issued under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, was unlawful in a 2-1 decision limited to three named plaintiffs. https://asil.org/ilib/the-u-s-court-of-international-trade-invalidates-trumps-10-global-tariff/ - [2026-06-11] The Federal Circuit granted the federal government's request to stay the ruling, allowing the government to continue collecting Section 122 tariffs as to the covered parties pending appeal, with consolidated appeals Nos. 2026-1804/1805 proceeding to a merits panel. https://www.subjecttoinquiry.com/2026/06/federal-circuit-stays-injunctions-against-section-122-balance-of-payments-tariffs-pending-appeal/ - [2026-09-08] As of this date, the Federal Circuit's public opinions-and-orders listing shows no merits opinion in 2026-1804 or 2026-1805; the appeal remains pending — no Federal Circuit decision yet, so no cert petition on Section 122 has been filed with SCOTUS as of early September 2026. https://strixsmart.com/resources/blog/section-122-refund-status - [2026-09-09] A new amicus brief was filed in the Section 122 tariff case at the Federal Circuit, arguing the impact of the new tariffs is as large or larger than policies previously invalidated on major-questions grounds , confirming the case is still at the appellate (not SCOTUS) stage. https://reason.com/volokh/2026/09/09/our-new-federal-circuit-amicus-brief-in-the-section-122-tariff-case/ - [2026-06-15] Separately, on the Section 301 China-tariff track, the U.S. Supreme Court denied without comment the plaintiff group's petition for certiorari in the test case for the China Section 301 tariff refund litigation (HMTX Industries v. United States) , meaning that avenue for a new "Yes" is now closed. https://www.thompsonhinesmartrade.com/2026/06/u-s-supreme-court-declines-review-of-china-section-301-tariff-challenge/ - No reporting found of any other pending or newly filed cert petition at the Supreme Court specifically concerning a Trump-era tariff (Section 232, Section 338, or further Section 122 litigation) as of early October 2026. BOTTOM LINE: The one tariff case the Supreme Court granted cert on (IEEPA/Learning Resources-V.O.S. Selections) was already decided on Feb 20, 2026, before this market even opened, and the only other SCOTUS-track tariff petition (Section 301/HMTX) was denied cert on June 15, 2026. The live successor dispute (Section 122 "balance-of-payments" tariffs) is still only at the Federal Circuit with no merits ruling as of Sept 8, 2026, so a fresh cert grant before Jan 1, 2027 would require an unusually fast appellate decision plus expedited Supreme Court review in under three months. NOT FOUND: Any news from the last 30 days (Sept 6–Oct 6, 2026) of a new certiorari petition being filed or granted in a tariff-related case (including any Federal Circuit ruling in the Section 122 appeal, or any Section 232/338 tariff litigation reaching SCOTUS).

- [2025-09-09] The Supreme Court's one and only tariff-related cert grant to date came in *Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump* / *Trump v. V.O.S. Selections*, when the Court granted a petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment, granted the motion to expedite and the petition in No. 25-250, consolidated the cases, and allotted one hour for oral argument , with argument held Nov. 5, 2025 and decision issued Feb. 20, 2026 — all before this market's Feb. 24, 2026 open, so this grant cannot itself satisfy a forward-looking "before Jan 2027" resolution. https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/learning-resources-inc-v-trump/ - [2026-02-20] The Court's decision held IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs , closing that case rather than opening a new cert question. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-1287_4gcj.pdf - [2026-06-15] The only subsequent tariff-adjacent cert petition was denied: the Court denied without comment the plaintiff group's petition for certiorari in the test case for the China Section 301 tariff refund litigation (HMTX Industries LLC, et al. v. United States et al.) , a base-rate data point showing SCOTUS declining further tariff review this term. https://www.thompsonhinesmartrade.com/2026/06/u-s-supreme-court-declines-review-of-china-section-301-tariff-challenge/ - [2026-05-07] A new tariff fight (Section 122 global surcharge) began at the trial-court level, with the CIT in *Oregon v. United States* holding that tariffs imposed by President Trump under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 are impermissible , starting a fresh appellate clock well behind the original IEEPA case's timeline. https://www.honigman.com/alert-3338 - [2026-06-11] That case is only now at the intermediate appellate stage: the Federal Circuit stayed the CIT judgment on June 11, 2026, and the appeal is still sitting with a merits panel with no decision yet. https://strixsmart.com/resources/blog/section-122-refund-status - [2026-09-08] As of early September 2026, the Federal Circuit's public opinions-and-orders listing shows no merits opinion in the consolidated Section 122 appeals, and the appeal remains pending — meaning any eventual cert petition has not even been filed yet. https://strixsmart.com/resources/blog/section-122-refund-status - [2026-09-30] A separate, even earlier-stage challenge to Trump's Section 301 "forced-labor" tariffs (10–12.5%) is still at the trial court: the U.S. Court of International Trade is set to consider a new legal challenge to President Donald Trump's trade policies and tariffs, centered on tariffs ranging from 10% to 12.5% that were imposed under a 1970s trade law , with commentators noting the trade court's review could take months, and the dispute could ultimately make its way back to the Supreme Court — implying any SCOTUS involvement is many months away at best. https://www.nbcpalmsprings.com/ca-us-and-world/2026/09/30/new-challenge-targets-trumps-10-to-125-tariffs-in-trade-court - [2026-10-01] CNBC confirms this Section 301 case is still at the oral-argument stage before a three-judge CIT panel, with no ruling yet, let alone an appeal to the Federal Circuit or a cert petition. https://www.cnbc.com/2026/09/30/trump-tariffs-trade-lawsuit.html - Historical base rate from the one prior instance: even under maximal expedition (cert before judgment, consolidated argument, no normal cert-petition wait) the IEEPA case still took roughly 5 months from petition/grant (Sept. 2025) to decision (Feb. 2026), and that was unusually fast given the stakes; ordinary (non-expedited) cert review from a final circuit-court merits decision typically adds many more months beyond that. BOTTOM LINE: The one tariff cert grant in this cycle occurred and was fully resolved before the market's Feb. 24, 2026 open, and the only subsequent tariff cert petition (Section 301/HMTX) was denied in June 2026; the two live successor disputes (Section 122 and the new Section 301 forced-labor tariffs) are still stuck at the Federal Circuit and CIT trial-court stages respectively with no cert petitions pending, so based on the pace of comparable litigation a fresh SCOTUS cert grant on a tariff case before Jan 1, 2027 looks historically unlikely absent another extraordinary expedited petition. NOT FOUND: No evidence of any currently pending cert petition (as opposed to a lower-court appeal) in a Trump-tariff case as of early October 2026; no confirmation of any Supreme Court order list or conference scheduled to consider such a petition before Jan 1, 2027.

YES means: the Supreme Court grants a petition for a writ of certiorari in any case primarily concerning Trump-imposed tariffs between now (Oct 6, 2026) and Jan 1, 2027. - [2026-09-08] The Section 122 "balance-of-payments" tariff appeal is still pending before a Federal Circuit merits panel (Nos. 2026-1804/1805), with no opinion issued yet; the panel's own June 11 stay order signaled skepticism of the CIT's ruling, stating it was "persuaded by the federal government's argument that the CIT majority's interpretation ... may be incorrect," which raises the odds of a prompt merits ruling that either side could then seek to expedite to the Supreme Court. https://strixsmart.com/resources/blog/section-122-refund-status - [2026-07-24] The Section 122 surcharge expired by its 150-day statutory cap, but the Federal Circuit appeal continues because it now concerns "roughly five months of duties already paid and the scope of any remedy," meaning the case is not moot and a final Federal Circuit ruling (for or against the government) remains a live, pending predicate for a cert petition before Jan 2027. https://strixsmart.com/resources/blog/section-122-refund-status - [2026-09-30] A third, faster-moving tariff track has emerged: the CIT held oral argument in *In Re Section 301 Forced Labor Cases* (CIT #26-03555), a consolidated challenge — led by Learning Resources, the same plaintiff from the original Supreme Court IEEPA case — to new 10-12.5% tariffs on 60 economies covering "approximately 99.4 percent of U.S. imports." https://tradelawdaily.com/article/2026/10/01/cit-judges-probe-government-about-ustrs-section-301-forced-labor-tariffs-2609300071?BC=bc_6abe4c2b39cf2 - [2026-09-30] CIT judges aggressively probed the government's legal theory at argument, including why USTR didn't rely on specific statutory subsections and whether a "functional ban" equals an "express ban," suggesting a relatively fast-moving, substantive record that could produce a CIT ruling within weeks to a few months rather than the year-plus timeline normal Section 301 cases have taken. https://libertyjusticecenter.org/mediaalert/court-of-international-trade-to-hear-challenge-to-sweeping-section-301-tariffs/ - [2026-09-29] Liberty Justice Center — the firm that "successfully won the landmark Supreme Court tariff case" (IEEPA) — is lead counsel on the Section 301 forced-labor challenge, meaning the same highly motivated, well-resourced litigants with a proven track record of securing expedited Supreme Court review are driving this case forward. https://libertyjusticecenter.org/mediaalert/court-of-international-trade-to-hear-challenge-to-sweeping-section-301-tariffs/ - [2025-09-09, precedent mechanism] The one successful precedent for a fast path to SCOTUS is squarely on record: in the original IEEPA case, the government itself sought certiorari before judgment and the Court "granted the motion to expedite and the petition in No. 25-250, consolidated the cases, and allotted one hour for oral argument," taking roughly five months total from the September grant to the February decision — showing the Court is willing to leapfrog the normal appellate process entirely for high-stakes tariff disputes if either party (especially the government) moves to expedite. https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/learning-resources-inc-v-trump/ - [2026-08-07] Twenty-five states separately sued over the same Section 301 forced-labor tariffs on Aug. 3, 2026, and "commentators expect the Court of International Trade to consolidate the pending challenges and decide them together," with any CIT vacatur (unlike the narrow Section 122 relief) potentially not "limited to the plaintiffs" — raising the stakes and the incentive for whichever side loses to seek immediate Supreme Court review, mirroring the IEEPA case's scale. https://www.tradelawcounsel.com/insights-news/2026/8/7/twenty-five-states-sue-to-block-the-section-301-forced-labor-tariffs - [2026-10-01] Coppersmith's tracker notes the government's answer in the Section 301 case was due October 2, 2026, after which "briefing schedules, motions for judgment on the agency record, and potential stay requests will play out — likely over months," implying a CIT ruling is plausible before year-end 2026, which would leave a narrow but non-zero window for an emergency cert-before-judgment petition before Jan 1, 2027. https://www.coppersmith.com/section-301-forced-labor-tariffs-2026/ - [2026-06-29] A certiorari petition (Docket No. 26-5667) was filed and stamped by the Supreme Court Clerk on June 29, 2026, though the specific subject matter of that filing could not be confirmed as tariff-related from available search results; it illustrates that new tariff-adjacent filings continue to reach the Court's docket throughout 2026. https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/26/26-5667/425521/20260924143447553_20260924-142910-00002362-00006098.pdf BOTTOM LINE: The strongest YES path is the Section 301 "forced-labor" tariff litigation (CIT #26-03555), led by the same Liberty Justice Center team that won the original IEEPA case, where a CIT ruling could plausibly land within months given the Sept. 30 argument's pace and the stakes of tariffs covering 99.4% of imports — with the Section 122 Federal Circuit appeal as a secondary, slower-moving candidate; but for either to reach a SCOTUS cert grant by Jan 1, 2027, it would require an expedited cert-before-judgment petition on a timeline as compressed as the unprecedented five-month IEEPA sprint, which has no second precedent yet. NOT FOUND: No confirmed cert petition specifically filed in either the Section 122 or Section 301 forced-labor tariff litigation as of October 6, 2026; no Federal Circuit merits ruling in Nos. 2026-1804/1805; no CIT ruling yet in the Section 301 forced-labor consolidated cases; the exact subject matter of SCOTUS docket No. 26-5667 could not be verified as tariff-related.

YES means: the Supreme Court grants (not merely "will decide" or "has pending," but formally grants) a writ of certiorari in a case primarily about Trump-imposed tariffs, on or before Jan 1, 2027. - [2026-09-08] The only live tariff case anywhere near the federal appellate pipeline — the Section 122 "balance-of-payments" surcharge fight (*State of Oregon v. Trump*, Fed. Cir. Nos. 2026-1804/1805) — remains with no merits opinion in 2026-1804 or 2026-1805; the appeal remains pending as of the most recent public filing check, meaning no Federal Circuit judgment exists yet from which either party could even file a cert petition. (https://strixsmart.com/resources/blog/section-122-refund-status) - [2026-09-08] The underlying stakes for that appeal have shrunk materially since the case began: the surcharge itself the surcharge expired on its own on July 24, 2026, under the 150-day statutory cap. So the appeal is no longer about whether the government may keep collecting. It is about roughly five months of duties already in the Treasury — a pure refund dispute is a weaker candidate for expedited/urgent Supreme Court intervention than a live, ongoing executive tariff regime (as IEEPA was). (https://strixsmart.com/resources/blog/section-122-refund-status) - [2026-07-24] Independent confirmation that Congress let the Section 122 clock lapse: that 150-day clock ran out on July 24, 2026; suffice it to say, Congress never acted to extend it , removing any live-policy urgency that drove the IEEPA case to the Court at record speed. (https://www.z2data.com/insights/how-the-termination-of-section-122-tariffs-impacts-your-supply-chain/) - [2026-06-11] Even the Federal Circuit's own stay order signals the merits panel leans toward the government on the statutory question (finding the government "likely to succeed on the merits" regarding the meaning of "balance-of-payments deficit"), which — if the panel ultimately rules for the government — removes the circuit split/urgency rationale that could prompt a swift cert grant, since a government win at the Federal Circuit creates no immediate crisis requiring Supreme Court intervention. (https://reason.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/Federal-Circuit-Section-122-Stay-Order-1.pdf) - [2026-09-30] A brand-new, separate challenge to Trump's Section 301 "forced-labor" 10–12.5% tariffs is still only at the CIT oral-argument stage with no ruling, several procedural layers (CIT ruling → Federal Circuit appeal → cert petition) away from any Supreme Court docket. (Previously reported by colleagues via CNBC/NBC Palm Springs.) - [2026-06-15] The Section 301 China-tariff track's only cert petition to reach the Court (HMTX Industries) was denied, and no replacement petition on any tariff topic has surfaced since — a direct precedent of the Court declining to re-engage with tariff litigation absent the kind of existential, immediately operative policy crisis that drove the original IEEPA grant. (Previously reported.) - [2026-09-09] Even litigation commentary from active participants frames the Section 122 fight as still squarely an appellate-court dispute: an amicus brief newly filed described the case as still pending before the Federal Circuit, with no indication of any imminent Federal Circuit decision, let alone a cert petition. (https://reason.com/volokh/2026/09/09/our-new-federal-circuit-amicus-brief-in-the-section-122-tariff-case/) - [Historical mechanism] The one precedent for an ultra-fast tariff cert grant (IEEPA/Learning Resources) required a sitting President actively enforcing a massive, ongoing global tariff regime with billions in daily revenue at stake, prompting the government itself to seek certiorari before judgment and expedited briefing. Section 122's tariffs no longer exist prospectively (expired July 24, 2026), so neither side faces the same emergency pressure to leapfrog the normal appellate process, making an analogous "cert before judgment" maneuver far less likely before Jan 1, 2027. - [Procedural arithmetic] Even assuming the Federal Circuit issues a merits opinion in Q4 2026, the losing party would have 90 days to petition for certiorari (or seek extensions), and the Court would then need to call for a response, distribute for conference, and vote to grant — a sequence that historically takes a minimum of 2-4 months even on an expedited track, pushing any realistic grant date past Jan 1, 2027 for any case not already before the Court. BOTTOM LINE: With the one SCOTUS-bound tariff dispute (Section 122) still stuck at the Federal Circuit with no merits decision as of early September 2026, its underlying tariffs already expired (mooting the prospective urgency that drove the record-fast IEEPA cert grant), and the other candidate (Section 301/HMTX) already denied cert in June 2026, the structural and procedural runway for a fresh Supreme Court cert grant on a Trump tariff case before Jan 1, 2027 looks very short, favoring NO. NOT FOUND: Any Federal Circuit merits opinion, any newly filed cert petition, or any Supreme Court order-list entry relating to Section 122, Section 301, or Section 232 tariffs between early September and October 6, 2026.