When certain tax free organizations such as various religious organizations engage in transactions involving merchandise, they might say that for a "donation" of some listed amount to their organization they will send a "gift" of some listed type. Although that incurs no tax, it also does not have any specific government agency to handle any disputes that might arise over the transaction, much like interstate sales. As a "donation" no recovery can be demanded based on the quality of the merchandise. A request for a refund might be honored or not.
The argument in South Dakota v. Wayfair Inc. (2017) was that the internet has changed the way people do business. Actually for most retail interstate business it was always as easy with catalogs as it is now with the internet. The more significant change is that state taxes have increased to a point where the cost of shipping no longer disfavors interstate sales as much as it did in the past.
Some local retailers often consider it in their best interest to discourage interstate sales, if not one way then another. They sometimes believe it is in the interests of all people in their state. They want their previous advantage restored. The decision in South Dakota v. Wayfair Inc. made that possible. It overturned the decision in Quill Corporation v. North Dakota (1992) which held that the lack of a "physical nexus" (such as docks or offices) in a state exempted a corporation from paying sales or use taxes in that state.
There is still no reconciliation of various state laws on business. There is still no agreement how much internet sales tax to charge or who should pay it. Some states do have laws on interstate purchases. If you live in Virginia, for example, someone must pay a 4.3 percent "use" tax on out of state purchases if no Virginia sales tax is paid. If your total interstate purchases for the year are less than $100 they are exempt, otherwise not. Since there is no reconciliation of various state business laws, Virginia's "use" tax is essentially a "tariff" and serves the same purpose as a tariff.
Modern economic theories do not recognize any net benefits to any parties involved in tariffs, including the governments that collect them. Modern industry tends to employ the best materials available even when, as they often are, remotely located. Isolationism in such a market is a disadvantage. Products from the isolated market can have less quality or cost more or both. The notion that any one state, however large, has all the best materials at the best price ignores reality. Arguments for tariffs can be short sighted.
Republicans tend to disfavor taxes except where they appear absolutely necessary and effective. However the "use tax" as an actual tariff might be favored by Trump supporters who in large numbers have broken ranks with the people who follow the economics taught in college. The apparent, if not actual, immediate beneficiaries are the business people who think their previous advantage should be restored. Neil Gorsuch voted for the decision in South Dakota v. Wayfair. Republicans in the 7th Congressional District of Virginia for the United States House of Representatives did elect a college professor of economics, Dave Brat, in 2014. What has he to say about Virginia's use tax? Virginia's use tax is a matter of state government and laws, Brat went from college professor directly to the federal government. He is currently challenged by Democrat Abigail Spanberger in the election in November. His campaign materials should be readily available online. He has an abundance of television campaign ads on local stations in Viginia.