Economy February 20, 2026

Small Toy Maker at Center of Landmark Ruling as Supreme Court Rejects Trump-Era Tariffs

Illinois-based Learning Resources led an early legal challenge to tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, seeking refunds and relief for importers

By Derek Hwang
Small Toy Maker at Center of Landmark Ruling as Supreme Court Rejects Trump-Era Tariffs

An Illinois family-owned educational toy company that imports most of its products from China was among the first small businesses to sue over tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. The U.S. Supreme Court struck down those tariffs, opening the possibility that importers could receive billions in refunds, though the court did not resolve the mechanics or timing of any repayment. The founder-turned-chief executive said his firm hopes to return to normal operations once duties are refunded, but legal and logistical obstacles remain.

Key Points

  • The U.S. Supreme Court struck down tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, affecting importers who had challenged the measures.
  • Learning Resources, an Illinois family-owned maker of educational toys that imports most products from China, was an early plaintiff and could be eligible for refunds after paying about $10 million in duties in 2025.
  • Small importers - which account for roughly 97% of U.S. importers and bring in about $868 billion of goods annually - were highlighted as particularly vulnerable to sudden tariff policies.

Overview

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday invalidated tariffs that had been imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, a decision that affects a wide set of importers who had challenged the duties in court. One of the first plaintiffs in that legal effort was Learning Resources Inc, an Illinois-based maker and importer of educational toys. The company, led for nearly 30 years by Rick Woldenberg, had launched a lawsuit last April after the tariffs were announced.

How a family business became a litigant

Learning Resources, founded in 1984 by Woldenberg's mother and with roots that trace to a business started by his grandfather more than a century ago, imports most of the educational toys it sells from China. Alongside a sister company, hand2mind, the firm produces items such as Alphabet Coffee Cups, which are designed to help children distinguish uppercase and lowercase letters, and Numberblocks, a math-learning toy set inspired by a British television series.

Woldenberg said the company, which employs about 500 people and sells in roughly 100 countries, moved quickly to challenge the tariff program because the duties imposed immediate financial strain. He estimated Learning Resources paid some $10 million in tariffs in 2025. Within days of the tariff announcement in April, he began speaking out against the measures. After winning at the district court level in June, Learning Resources asked the Supreme Court to take up an expedited review.

"I decided that I would have a lot harder time dealing with not acting than acting," Woldenberg said in an interview, stressing that his fight was not political but fiscal. "It’s about taxes. They owe us money... every American agrees we pay too much in taxes, and no one will want to pay a tax they don’t have to pay."

Business disruptions and operational strain

The tariffs had tangible effects on the company’s operations. Woldenberg said expansion plans, including a proposed addition of 600,000 square feet of warehouse and office space in Illinois, were scaled back. Resources were diverted to redesigning supply chains and to other tasks required to respond to the sudden change in trade costs.

Learning Resources shifted priorities away from innovation and growth toward short-term survival, trimming spending and seeing lower receipts as a result. "We shrank last year," Woldenberg said.

He described the practical challenges of attempting to move manufacturing away from China on an emergency timetable. The company relies on more than 30 injection machines, each weighing several tons and used to pump molten plastic into thousands of steel casings. Transferring that kind of production would demand dozens of flatbed trucks and multiple cranes, Woldenberg said, and would be prohibitively expensive from both a logistics and a timing perspective. He also emphasized the specialized skills at his partner factory in China that meet the toy industry’s stringent safety standards, noting that rebuilding that capability elsewhere could take months or years.

Legal outcome and remaining questions

With the Supreme Court’s ruling, the legal basis for the tariff program under the cited emergency powers has been rejected. Learning Resources was among the small businesses that initiated litigation, and the company and other importers could now be entitled to share in billions of dollars in potential refunds. The Supreme Court, however, did not address how or when refunds would be distributed.

Legal experts have warned that the process to secure refunds will likely be lengthy and legally complicated. The Supreme Court’s decision does not end the litigation or administrative work required to determine the mechanics of reimbursement. Observers cited by the company and others also note that the former administration could seek alternative legal avenues to reinstate similar duties, though the details of any such efforts were not resolved by the ruling.

Broader implications for small importers

According to a 2025 report by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce referenced by company representatives, small businesses like Learning Resources and hand2mind account for roughly 97% of U.S. importers and collectively bring in about $868 billion in goods annually. The report described the tariff program as a threat to the viability of such firms, which often operate with narrow margins and limited flexibility to absorb sudden increases in import costs.

Woldenberg said his campaign against the tariffs sought to highlight how unrealistic it can be to expect companies to re-shore complex manufacturing overnight. "Moving a supply chain out of a country on an emergency basis, as if bombs are falling on your head, is a project no one is prepared for," he said.

Next steps for the company

After spending much of the past year in court, Woldenberg said he plans to steer Learning Resources back toward normal operations. He expressed hope that tariff payments the company made will be refunded and that those funds will be redeployed into the business.

"And as soon as they do, we’ll start spending it," he said. "We want to run our company again."


Key facts reiterated

  • Learning Resources filed suit in April after tariffs were announced and later sought review by the U.S. Supreme Court following a favorable district court outcome in June.
  • The firm estimates it paid about $10 million in tariffs during 2025 and employs approximately 500 people while selling in around 100 countries.
  • A 2025 U.S. Chamber of Commerce report cited by company representatives notes small businesses make up about 97% of U.S. importers and collectively import roughly $868 billion in goods annually.

Risks

  • The process of obtaining refunds for duties paid is expected to be lengthy and legally complex, creating continued financial uncertainty for affected importers.
  • There is a possibility the administration could attempt to revive similar tariffs through different legal authorities, leaving the underlying trade environment unsettled.
  • Operational challenges remain for companies that relied on foreign manufacturing: moving specialized production is expensive, time-consuming and may take months or years to replicate.

More from Economy

Bessent Says Signs Point to Stronger Labor Demand After Capex Surge Feb 20, 2026 Bessent: Administration to Shift Tariff Strategy After Supreme Court Ruling Feb 20, 2026 Trump Repeats Call for Much Lower Interest Rates, Criticizes Fed Chair Feb 20, 2026 White House to Apply 10% Global Tariff for 150 Days, Citing Trade Act Authority Feb 20, 2026 Trump directs temporary 10% global tariff under Trade Act after Supreme Court rebuke Feb 20, 2026