The following lawsuits were filed recently at the Court of International Trade:

Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week, in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.

A group of five small importers filed their opposition to the U.S. government's motion to transfer their case challenging President Donald Trump's tariffs imposed on China under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to the Court of International Trade. The importers, led by Simplified, argued that CIT doesn't have exclusive jurisdiction to hear the case because IEEPA doesn't provide for tariffs (Emily Ley Paper v. Donald J. Trump, N.D. Fla. # 3:25-00464).

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of April 28 - May 4:

Importer Inspired Ventures moved the Court of International Trade for a mediator in its case against CBP's decision to put two of its rubber tire entries on hold under suspicions that the goods had a high risk of tariff evasion. Inspired Ventures said the issue is "ripe for settlement" in light of the government's concession that CBP erred in detaining the tires (Inspired Ventures v. United States, CIT # 24-00062).

The Court of International Trade doesn't have jurisdiction to hear importer Eteros Technologies USA's claim that CBP retaliated against the company's executives after the importer received a favorable ruling at the trade court, the U.S. argued. Filing a motion to dismiss at the trade court on May 2, the government said Eteros' claim revolves around two "immigration-related matters," which CIT doesn't have jurisdiction to hear (Eteros Technologies USA v. United States, CIT # 25-00036).

The U.S. District Court for Southern Mississippi granted NetChoice’s unopposed motion Friday and lifted the stay of proceedings in a case over a Mississippi age-verification law for social media.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit lacks authority to review a Montana court's order transferring a case from four Blackfeet Nation tribe members against various trade actions taken by President Donald Trump to the Court of International Trade, the U.S. argued on May 1. Moving the court to dismiss the case, the government said the appellate court "reviews final orders, but an order transferring a case under 28 U.S.C. § 1631 for litigation to continue in another court is necessarily not final" (Susan Webber v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 9th Cir. # 25-2717).

Court of International Trade Judge Timothy Reif heard oral arguments April 30 regarding an affirmative evasion finding for countertop importer Vanguard Trading Co. Among other things, the case challenges the strict liability standard CBP has established for importers regarding evasion and CBP’s ability to decide when it must seek scope clarification from the Commerce Department during EAPA investigations (Vanguard Trading Co. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00253).

The Court of International Trade on April 29 told the 12 states challenging President Donald Trump's tariff action taken under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act they may file a brief laying out their position on a group of five importers' motion for summary judgment against Trump's reciprocal tariffs by May 8. The court said in a text-only order that the brief, not to exceed 10,000 words, doesn't bar the states from filing their own motion at a later date, nor will the brief be construed as a "waiver or forfeiture of any claim or argument."