The 12 U.S. states challenging President Donald Trump's ability to impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act filed their reply brief at the Supreme Court on Oct. 20, arguing that the text of IEEPA doesn't allow for any tariffs to be imposed and that Trump's reciprocal tariffs and tariffs to combat the flow of fentanyl don't meet the statute's other requirements (Donald J. Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, U.S. 25-250) (Learning Resources v. Donald J. Trump, U.S. 24-1287).
The Court of International Trade on Oct. 21 granted the government's motion for default judgment against importer E-Dong, U.S.A. for negligently failing to pay a federal excise tax on 20 entries of its "Korean distilled beverage soju." Judge Timothy Reif ordered E-Dong to pay $234,748.30 in unpaid federal excise tax along with pre- and post-judgment interest, which shall be calculated according to the relevant statutes.
The U.S. will appeal a recent Court of International Trade decision vacating the Commerce Department's decision not to collect antidumping and countervailing duties on solar cells from Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam (Auxin Solar v. United States, CIT # 23-00274).
President Donald Trump told reporters on Oct. 15 that he would like to attend the Nov. 5 oral argument at the Supreme Court regarding whether he can use the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose tariffs. After declaring that the tariffs he has imposed are essential for economic and national security matters, Trump said: "I'm going to go to the Supreme Court to watch it. I've not done that, and I've had some pretty big cases."
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Oct. 6-12:
The Court of International Trade upheld CBP's determination, made on remand, that importer Scioto Valley Woodworking, Inc., evaded the antidumping duty and countervailing duty orders on wooden cabinets and vanities from China. In a decision made public Oct. 9, Judge Lisa Wang rejected Scioto's claim that CBP can only make an affirmative evasion finding if it finds the importer to actually have imported covered merchandise through evasion, and the judge found the evasion determination to be supported by substantial evidence.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Sept. 29 - Oct. 5:
Offering its thoughts as an amicus curiae to the Supreme Court’s International Emergency Economic Powers Act tariffs case, the nonprofit Consumer Watchdog said that if IEEPA does grant the executive the powers President Donald Trump claims, the law itself is unconstitutional under the nondelegation doctrine (Donald J. Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, U.S. 25-250) (Learning Resources v. Donald J. Trump, U.S. 24-1287).
Judges at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit pressed counsel for importer Blue Sky the Color of Imagination and the government during oral argument on Oct. 7 in the importer's customs classification suit on its notebooks with calendars. During the argument, Judges Alan Lourie, Raymond Chen and William Bryson grappled with whether the court is bound by its 2010 ruling in Mead v. U.S. and whether the goods are properly classified as calendars or diaries (Blue Sky The Color of Imagination v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 24-1710).
The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Sept. 30 vacated a decision from USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service to "switch to a new system for mitigating the risk of a pest outbreak caused by imported Chilean table grapes." Judge Amir Ali held that the action was arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act (California Table Grape Commission v. U.S. Dep't of Ag., D.D.C. # 24-02645).