Background
After the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decides V.O.S. Selections, Inc. v. United States (appeal from CIT Case No. 1:25-cv-00066), the losing party may seek Supreme Court review—either via a petition for certiorari, a petition for certiorari before judgment, or an emergency application. The plaintiffs have indicated they will pursue Supreme Court relief if the tariffs remain in force.
Resolution Criteria
This market resolves to “Yes” only if all of the following conditions are met:
Review Granted
The Supreme Court accepts the case—i.e., it grants certiorari or grants certiorari before judgment — before December 31, 2026.
Court & Case
The order is in V.O.S. Selections, Inc. v. United States (Supreme Court docket number TBD).
Form of Relief
The Supreme Court issues any injunction (temporary, preliminary, or permanent) that halts enforcement, collection, or implementation of the Liberation Day tariffs. Qualifying orders include:
• an injunction pending disposition of the petition (often called a “temporary” or “interim” injunction);
• a stay of the tariffs under 28 U.S.C. § 2101(f) or Supreme Court Rule 23 (functionally the same as a temporary nationwide injunction);
• a merits judgment that expressly enjoins the tariffs (a permanent injunction).Scope
The operative language applies nation-wide, not solely to the named plaintiffs.
Timing
The injunction order itself must be entered on or before December 31, 2026.
The market resolves to “No” if any of the following occur before the deadline and no qualifying “Yes” order has been entered:
Cert Denied – The Supreme Court denies certiorari (or dismisses or withdraws the petition) without issuing a qualifying injunction.
Deadline Passes – December 31 2026 passes without an order that satisfies all “Yes” elements.
Relief Denied – The Court explicitly denies injunctive relief or vacates/overturns any previously issued injunction.
Case Ends Without Relief – The matter is settled, declared moot, or otherwise terminated without a qualifying injunction.
Tariffs Rescinded – The Liberation Day tariffs are fully rescinded or nullified by executive or legislative action before the Court grants an injunction.
Clarifications
Shadow-docket orders count so long as they fulfill every “Yes” element (including the cert-grant requirement).
A Supreme Court order that merely affirms a lower-court injunction counts only if the Court has granted cert and its mandate leaves the nationwide injunction fully in force by the deadline.
An order limited to specific importers or shipments does not satisfy the nationwide-scope criterion.
Subsequent actions by lower courts, Congress, or the Administration do not affect resolution; only whether a qualifying Supreme Court order existed by the deadline matters.
1,000Gemini thinks the merits judgement from scotus fulfills the yes criteria:
While you are correct that the Federal Circuit previously vacated the CIT’s nationwide injunction, the Supreme Court's action today changed that status.
1. The Federal Circuit Remanded, It Didn't "End" the Relief
In August 2025, the Federal Circuit affirmed that the tariffs were illegal but vacated the nationwide scope of the CIT's injunction, remanding the case for the CIT to determine if a narrower injunction (just for the plaintiffs) was more appropriate. However, the Federal Circuit stayed its mandate, meaning the case remained live and under appellate review rather than ending "without relief".
2. SCOTUS Affirmation of the CIT Judgment
The Supreme Court's ruling today specifically affirmed the judgment in Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, Inc. (No. 25-250).
• In legal terms, when SCOTUS affirms a judgment that held a government action unlawful and had originally issued an injunction, it restores the legal force of that victory.
• The market's "Yes" criteria (Condition 3) includes a "merits judgment that expressly enjoins the tariffs" (permanent injunction). By affirming the lower court's finding that the tariffs are invalid and restoring the case to the CIT, the Court has effectively "enjoined" the government from continued collection, even if the final "nationwide" paperwork is technically handled by the CIT on remand.
I think this should be resolved no
(The Federal Circuit vacated the CIT’s nationwide injunction, SCOTUS affirmed that judgment. There’s no live injunction, just a declaratory ruling that IEEPA doesn’t authorize tariffs. The market criteria require an actual injunction, not just a merits win. “Case Ends Without Relief.”)