The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Sept. 10-16:
Court of International Trade
The United States Court of International Trade is a federal court which has national jurisdiction over civil actions regarding the customs and international trade laws of the United States. The Court was established under Article III of the Constitution by the Customs Courts Act of 1980. The Court consists of nine judges appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate and is located in New York City. The Court has jurisdiction throughout the United States and has exclusive jurisdictional authority to decide civil action pertaining to international trade against the United States or entities representing the United States.
The Consumer Technology Association “will decide our best course of action if and when the President imposes retaliatory tariffs,” said CTA President Gary Shapiro when asked if the association will sue the Trump administration to block proposed Section 301 tariffs from taking effect. The trade group filed its “objections” to the third tranche of Trade Act Section 301 tariffs on Chinese imports in Sept. 6 comments that also questioned the duties’ legality (see 1809070025).
President Donald Trump's authority to impose Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum is backed by constitutional provisions giving the president independent oversight of national security and foreign affairs, the Justice Department said in a Sept. 14 filing with the Court of International Trade. The filing was in response to a legal challenge from the American Institute for International Steel and two companies (see 1807200023) seeking a summary judgment to stop the tariffs. The Supreme Court also has previously ruled on the issue, DOJ said.
The Court of International Trade declined to grant summary judgments sought by both parties in a lawsuit over the correct classification of Ziploc plastic bags. CIT Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves ruled that "because genuine issues of material fact remain unresolved, the court denies the cross-motions for summary judgment and the case shall proceed to trial." The case involves Ziploc bags imported from Thailand through the Port of Los Angles in 2013. S.C. Johnson & Son, represented by Pisani & Roll, challenged CBP's classification of the bags as “articles for the conveyance or packing of goods” in heading 3923. S.C. Johnson argues that the bags are better classified in heading 3924 as “other household articles.” While CIT denied the summary judgment requests, it declined to address the classification arguments, including whether Generalized System of Preferences benefits apply.
No lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Sept. 3-9.
The government is opposing a bid by a group of importers to have CBP issue interim drawback regulations that would allow the agency to begin processing claims under the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act, according to recent court filings. Though those importers hope interim calculation procedures can be issued as soon as October (see 1808280037), the government said the drawback calculation provisions are “not easily divorced” from the rest of a recent proposed rule, and urged the Court of International Trade to let the rulemaking process proceed normally.
The Court of International Trade on Sept. 6 ruled against several petroleum importers seeking drawback on taxes and fees, finding CBP correctly denied the claims because the importers did not include amounts for merchandise processing fee, harbor maintenance tax and excise taxes. Following precedent set by the Federal Circuit over the past 20 years, CIT said the importers were required to file a complete claim within the three years after export, and that the complete claim must include the full amount of drawback requested.
The Consumer Technology Association is considering a lawsuit to challenge the proposed tariffs on $200 billion worth of goods from China under Section 301, the trade group said in a news release. “We are reviewing all options,” emailed spokeswoman Izzy Santa when asked if CTA will sue to block the levies. CTA's comments "detail how these tariffs may be vulnerable to a legal challenge because they are not based on the required legal finding of unfair business practices by China, and instead are retaliatory in nature and require a separate Section 301 investigation, which USTR did not conduct," it said. Gary Shapiro, CTA's CEO, said "we are skeptical the $200 billion tariffs will be upheld in court if challenged."
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Aug. 27 - Sept. 2:
Holiday-themed goods imported by Russ Berrie are largely not classifiable in heading 9505 as festive articles, the Court of International Trade said in an Aug. 30 decision. In a long-running classification challenge that took over a quarter-century to resolve, the court mostly sided with the government on the articles remaining in dispute, finding them classifiable as toys, lamps and footwear, with a single exception.