Court of International Trade Judge Gary Katzmann granted the government's stay request in various cases before him, due to the federal government shutdown. The judge gave the U.S. five days to file a status report after the shutdown ends to propose revised deadlines for the cases. Katzmann's approach differs slightly from the other judges, who largely also stayed the cases in which the U.S. had requested a pause, though the judges gave the U.S. a range of seven to 14 days to file a status report (see 2510020051). Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves extended the government's deadlines "commensurate with the duration of the lapse in appropriations," while Judge Jane Restani was the only judge to deny the stay motions, writing that the U.S. can seek specific relief if a deadline looms before the end of the shutdown.

A Florida law that would ban kids from social media doesn't violate the First Amendment, said Attorney General James Uthmeier (R) in a brief filed Friday that asks a federal court to reverse a preliminary injunction on the law.

The following lawsuit was filed recently at the Court of International Trade:

Importer Detroit Axle opposed the government's motions for an extension of time to respond to the company's motions for leave to amend its complaint and for partial summary judgment in its case against President Donald Trump's decision to end the de minimis threshold for goods from China. Detroit Axle said the U.S. "has failed to establish 'good cause'" for being given another 35 days to respond to the motions to amend and for partial summary judgment if the Court of International Trade dissolves the stay of the case (Axle of Dearborn d/b/a Detroit Axle v. United States, CIT # 25-00091).

Commerce wrongly requested from a mandatory respondent in a countervailing duty administrative review information about five government programs the department never determined were countervailable subsidies, exporter OCP said Sept. 30 (OCP v. United States, CIT Consol. # 24-00227).

The Court of International Trade's ruling that a product is "imported" for duty drawback purposes when it's admitted into a foreign-trade zone and not when entered for domestic consumption would lead to a partial repeal of the FTZ Act, importer King Maker Marketing argued in a reply brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. King Maker said the trade court's decision would lead to "absurd and anomalous results," since it would require finding the clock for drawback claims to start before the right to make the claim accrues (King Maker Marketing v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 25-1819).

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit denied the government's attempt to stay the case from members of Blackfeet Nation against the tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act due to the federal government shutdown as "unnecessary" in light of the court's order issued in response to the shutdown (Susan Webber v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 9th Cir. # 25-2717).

Court of International Trade judges Mark Barnett, Joseph Laroski, Lisa Wang, Jennifer Choe-Groves, M. Miller Baker, Claire Kelly, Timothy Reif and Richard Eaton stayed various cases before them after the government asked for a stay in light of the federal government shutdown.

The following lawsuit was filed recently at the Court of International Trade:

The parties challenging tariffs issued under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act asked the Supreme Court to grant divided argument among the three groups of plaintiffs challenging the tariffs and to allow for 45 minutes of argument for each side. The three groups are five importers that filed suit at the Court of International Trade, 12 U.S. states that filed suit at CIT, and two importers that filed their case at the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Donald J. Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, U.S. 25-250) (Learning Resources v. Donald J. Trump, U.S. 24-1287).