The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Sept. 22-28:
The U.S. opened a customs penalty suit last week against wire garment hanger importer LGA Trading and its director, Galo Goya, at the Court of International Trade, seeking over $3.1 million as a penalty for negligence and over $1.9 million in unpaid duties (United States v. LGA Trading, CIT # 25-00214).
The likelihood of the Supreme Court striking down President Donald Trump's tariffs issued under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act is a "coin flip," various attorneys said during a Sept. 30 webinar hosted by The Budget Lab, a policy research center at Yale University. Scott Lincicome, vice president of general economics at the Cato Institute, an amicus in the IEEPA tariffs cases, noted a "very clear split" among trade lawyers and constitutional lawyers as to where the Supreme Court will come out on this issue.
The case against the lists 3 and 4A tariffs is unlikely to be heard by the Supreme Court or the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and the recent decision from the Federal Circuit upholding the tariffs likely gives the Trump administration greater confidence in using tariff authorities other than the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, various attorneys told us.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Sept. 15-21:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit on Sept. 23 set aside part of the Federal Maritime Commission's rule limiting the parties against whom "demurrage and detention" fees may be assessed. Judges Sri Srinivasan, Robert Wilkins and J. Michelle Childs held that the commission arbitrarily and capriciously exempted motor carriers from being assessed these fees, given the FMC's "stated rationale" to confine fees to parties who are in a "contractual relationship with the billing party."
CBP failed to explain its finding that Dominican exporter Kingtom Aluminio made its aluminum extrusions with forced labor, the Court of International Trade held on Sept. 23. Vacating and remanding the forced labor finding, Judge Timothy Reif said the agency failed to "articulate a satisfactory explanation for its action” based on a “rational connection between the facts found and the choice made" in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act's arbitrary and capricious standard.
Two Chinese nationals were recently sentenced to lengthy prison sentences for importing fentanyl precursor chemicals and money laundering through Wuhan-based chemical manufacturer Amarvel Biotech, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York announced last week. Qingzhou Wang, who operated as Amarvel's principal executive, was sentenced Sept. 18 to 25 years in prison, while Yiyi Chen, the company's marketing manager, was sentenced last month to 15 years.
The U.S. filed its opening brief at the Supreme Court on Sept. 19 in the lead cases on the legality of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Solicitor General D. John Sauer said the reciprocal tariffs and tariffs on China, Canada and Mexico meant to stop the flow of fentanyl are a valid exercise of IEEPA, adding that the tariffs are a proper expression of presidential policymaking in emergency situations.
The Supreme Court set oral argument for the lead cases on the legality of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act for Nov. 5 (Donald J. Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, U.S. 25-250) (Learning Resources v. Donald J. Trump, U.S. 24-1287).