The Court of International Trade held oral arguments Dec. 19 in a case filed by steel importers alleging that Section 232 tariffs are unconstitutional (see 1806270036). The American Iron and Steel Institute, which filed an amicus brief in the lawsuit, put out a statement Dec. 19 that said: "We continue to strongly believe this case is without merit and the effort by importers of foreign steel to undermine the Section 232 relief through this case is bound to fail. Congress acted within its constitutional authority when it authorized the president to take action to adjust imports, when the Secretary of Commerce has determined that such imports threaten to impair the national security."
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Dec. 10-16:
Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh likely will participate if the Supreme Court is asked to review the FCC net neutrality rollback, said court watchers, noting justices have wide leeway on recusals. They recused themselves without explanation from a November decision not to consider the prior commission's 2015 Communications Act Title II net neutrality order (see 1811050008). Their apparent reasons -- possible conflicts over Roberts' shares and Kavanaugh's lower court participation -- aren't expected to be repeated if the current Republican-run FCC's Title I order comes before them.
Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh likely will participate if the Supreme Court is asked to review the FCC net neutrality rollback, said court watchers, noting justices have wide leeway on recusals. They recused themselves without explanation from a November decision not to consider the prior commission's 2015 Communications Act Title II net neutrality order (see 1811050008). Their apparent reasons -- possible conflicts over Roberts' shares and Kavanaugh's lower court participation -- aren't expected to be repeated if the current Republican-run FCC's Title I order comes before them.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Dec. 3-9:
The Court of International Trade on Dec. 7 ruled in favor of an importer challenging increased CBP bonding requirements, finding them unnecessary given the importer’s future import plans and detrimental to the importer’s ability to remain in business. Unusual circumstances related to the importer’s shipments from the previous year, as well as the importer’s practice of withdrawing from a bonded warehouse for consumption, mean the importer’s current continuous bond should be sufficient, CIT said.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Nov. 26 - Dec. 2:
The Court of International Trade on Nov. 29 declined to rule in favor of an importer facing nearly $3.5 million in penalties and unpaid duties based on allegations it fraudulently misclassified and undervalued entries of wearing apparel, sending the case to trial to decide whether the government missed the statute of limitations for customs penalty cases. Greenlight Organic denies the allegations, and also says the government filed its action more than five years after it purportedly found out about the violations. The government says it’s still within the five-year period of when it first obtained double-invoicing records from Greenlight. “More facts are needed to ascertain when the Government first had knowledge of Greenlight’s fraudulent misclassification and undervaluation activities, including when the Government began to suspect a potential double-invoicing scheme and when the Government had knowledge of an intent to defraud with respect to the misclassification of entries,” CIT said. Because more facts are necessary, CIT denied Greenlight’s motion for summary judgment and said Greenlight and the government could submit more evidence on the statute of limitations issue at trial.
A ban on imports of some Mexican seafood will remain in effect, after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Nov. 28 denied a motion to stay the lower court ruling that set the ban. The Court of International Trade in July granted the preliminary injunction (see 1807260039), which bans importation of fish and fish products from Mexican commercial fisheries that use gillnets within the range of the endangered vaquita, amid concerns the fishing practice is driving the porpoise species to extinction. CBP subsequently set certification requirements for Mexican seafood in response to the court order (see 1808290047). Now on appeal, the Federal Circuit said in a one-page, non-precedential decision that the government “has not established that a stay of the order pending appeal is warranted here.” It did, however, leave the door open to a quick resolution of the case. “Given the urgency expressed in the government’s motion and the fact that the government self-expedited the filing of its opening brief, the court notes that it will consider a motion by the government to expedite oral argument in this appeal.”
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Nov. 19-25: