The United States Supreme Court has nullified certain tariffs imposed by Donald Trump on foreign goods, which have been a prominent feature of the tumultuous period during his second term.

The court’s decision specifically targets tariffs enforced through the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a statute from 1977 originally designed to restrict the president’s power to declare a national emergency to threats originating outside the U.S. Trump’s use of the IEEPA to justify tariffs on imports from countries like Canada, Mexico, and China was unprecedented and controversial. These tariffs, including so-called “reciprocal” duties on global imports, have faced legal scrutiny since their inception. Furthermore, the IEEPA was utilized to terminate the de minimis exemption, which previously allowed packages of certain low value to enter the U.S. without duty.

Despite the Supreme Court’s ruling, other tariffs not linked to the IEEPA, such as those on steel and aluminum, remain unaffected. The Trump administration is exploring alternative methods to impose tariffs. During a press briefing on Friday, Trump criticized the Supreme Court while lauding Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s dissent. He also pledged to introduce further comprehensive tariffs and to investigate unfair trade practices.

The implications for importers, small businesses, and consumers, who have shouldered billions in tariffs, remain uncertain. The ruling does not specify whether refunds will be issued. Justice Kavanaugh, in his dissent, suggested that the U.S. Treasury might have to reimburse importers who paid tariffs under the IEEPA, predicting that the refund process could be disorderly. According to The New York Times, refund claims could amount to $120 billion, but consumers, who often bear the brunt of tariffs, are unlikely to see refunds. Monica Gorman, from Crowell Global Advisors and a former manufacturing official under Joe Biden, indicated in an email to The Verge that the matter would be transferred to the Court of International Trade, which might take months to resolve.

Gorman noted, “The president has announced Section 122 tariffs to be effective almost immediately at a 10 percent rate. Although the 122 statute limits this to 150 days without Congressional approval, it allows the administration time to pursue further tariff measures under Section 301 and other statutes.” She concluded, “In essence, the industry should anticipate a persistently high-tariff environment for the foreseeable future.”

The National Retail Federation said the decision “provides much-needed certainty for US businesses and manufacturers,” and called for “a seamless process to refund the tariffs to U.S. importers.”

Small businesses were some of the first and most vocal opponents of Trump’s tariffs, and US-based companies relying on components and parts from abroad sounded the alarm early on. We Pay the Tariffs, a coalition of hundreds of small businesses, issued a statement celebrating the ruling but cautioned that “a legal victory is meaningless without actual relief for the businesses that paid these tariffs.

“The administration’s only responsible course of action now is to establish a fast, efficient, and automatic refund process that returns tariff money to the businesses that paid it. Small businesses cannot afford to wait months or years while bureaucratic delays play out, nor can they afford expensive litigation just to recover money that was unlawfully collected from them in the first place. These businesses need their money back now.”

From the beginning, Trump used tariffs as a cudgel for obedience from foreign governments and big corporations, meaning the taxes were both massively disruptive and subject to change at any moment, especially if a party rolled over for the administration. The rapidly changing nature of tariffs meant that businesses and consumers were reacting in real time. Now, we’re in a new era of uncertainty but with different questions — some consumers and businesses will want to once again stock up for an unclear future.

To be sure, the SCOTUS decision is a blow to Trump’s agenda, but businesses and consumers are still living in a trade nightmare of the president’s own making: The Port of Los Angeles told CNN it’s expecting an influx of cargo ships as American importers rush to bring inventory into the country. Kathryn Anne Edwards, economist and policy consultant, told The Verge in an email that there’s still uncertainty after the ruling.

“Taking control of tariffs out of [Trump’s] hands is unequivocally good for the economy,” she said. “That’s not to say the ruling won’t cause harm, but he was using the American consumer as leverage.”

As economists warned, the American consumer is likely to foot the bill — for future tariffs imposed by Trump, for refunds, and for a new normal of higher prices that companies have no reason to roll back.

“I think the political blowback could be incredible, given that companies are poised to see a refund, but consumers are not,” Edwards said. Approval rates and attitudes toward businesses had hit historic lows as it is, she said.

“Many people will view this as a payoff to companies at their expense.”