The Court of International Trade denied a group of importers' motion for a preliminary injunction against liquidation of their entries subject to tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act on the basis that the trade court has the power to order reliquidation of the entries if the Supreme Court strikes down the IEEPA tariffs.
The Court of International Trade on Dec. 12 denied the government's motion for reconsideration of the trade court's previous decision to vacate CBP's finding that Dominican exporter Kingtom Aluminio made its aluminum extrusions with forced labor. Although Judge Timothy Reif said he made a mistake of fact in the initial decision, the mistake was a "harmless error," and that no mistake of law was made.
International Trade Today is providing readers with the top stories from last week in case they were missed. All articles can be found by searching on the titles or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
Trade lawyers are split over the necessity of filing lawsuits now to secure potential International Emergency Economic Powers Act tariff refunds should the Supreme Court invalidate them, according to interviews with lawyers.
The Court of International Trade erred in ruling that importer Blue Sky The Color of Imagination's planning calendars are diaries under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 4820.10.2010, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held on Dec. 4. Judges Alan Lourie, William Bryson and Raymond Chen said the trade court violated the principle of stare decisis by skirting the CAFC's prior interpretation of the term "diary."
NEW YORK -- Apparel import compliance professionals more used to thinking about bills of lading and purchase orders than the major questions doctrine had their hopes raised -- and dashed -- at the annual U.S. Fashion Industry Association conference.
A group of 44 leading economists, including former Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen and four Nobel Prize winners, filed an amicus brief at the Supreme Court on Oct. 23 to contest President Donald Trump's reciprocal tariffs, arguing that the threat underlying the tariffs, sustained trade deficits, don't amount to an "unusual and extraordinary" threat to the U.S. economy, as required by the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (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 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 U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Sept. 25 upheld the Lists 3 and 4A Section 301 tariffs. CAFC Judges Todd Hughes and Alan Lourie, along with Judge Rodney Gilstrap of the Eastern District of Texas, who was sitting by designation, said the tariffs were a valid exercise of the government's authority under Section 307(a)(1)(C), which lets the U.S. Trade Representative "modify or terminate any action" taken under Section 301, where such action is "no longer appropriate."