The Trump administration’s tariffs are at the center of yet another lawsuit.

A group of small businesses Friday filed a pair of suits against the U.S. government over the latest round of global tariffs announced last week. The tariffs, enacted under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 and designed to combat forced labor in global supply chains, according to the administration, range from 10% to 12.5%.

They replace the previous round of 10% global tariffs, which were imposed under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, after they expired Friday at 12:01 a.m.

The first suit was filed by Liberty Justice Center, the same organization that sued the administration for tariffs enacted under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. The U.S. Supreme Court struck down those levies as unconstitutional earlier this year.

The center filed the lawsuit in the Court of International Trade on behalf of a New York-based retailer of spices and a California watch retailer. It asks that the government halt the enforcement and collection of the Section 301 tariffs, and requests a refund of duties that have been unlawfully collected.

In a statement, Liberty Justice Center alleged that the United States Trade Representative “acted arbitrarily and capriciously by imposing near-uniform tariffs across 60 materially different economies without a reasoned, record-based explanation for how the tariffs would address the practices USTR identified.”

According to the suit, Section 301 “is not a freestanding authorization to tax substantially all imports from substantially all trading partners at rates selected to replicate the invalidated IEEPA tariff regime rather than to eliminate identified foreign practices.”

The second lawsuit makes the same ask as the first, on similar grounds. It was filed by two other small businesses: Learning Resources and hand2mind, which also challenged the IEEPA tariffs that advanced to the Supreme Court. The Section 122 tariffs were designed as a temporary replacement for the IEEPA tariffs after the Supreme Court decision but expired after 150 days per the terms of the trade act.

“In my view, the Section 301 tariffs are clearly unlawful,” Kimberly Clausing, a professor of tax law at the UCLA School of Law and a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, told CNBC in an email statement, adding that the Trump administration’s focus on forced labor “is a mere pretext for recreating the IEEPA tariff regime.”

If the tariffs once again advance to the Supreme Court, the legal process will take some time, just like it did for the IEEPA tariffs. The court heard the case in November of 2025 and didn’t release a decision until February 2026. The process for refunds on IEEPA tariffs, meanwhile, was only recently standardized, and some businesses are still waiting for their money back.