The U.S. defended its bid to transfer a case challenging President Donald Trump's tariffs on Canada imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and Section 232 to the Court of International Trade, arguing that the trade court has exclusive jurisdiction to hear the case and that the plaintiffs' convenience in keeping the suit in Montana is "irrelevant" to CIT's jurisdiction. Filing a reply brief on April 16, the government said the plaintiffs, four members of the Blackfeet Nation tribe, "ignore or misunderstand" CIT's "specialized nature and the fact that that court may also review the implementation of executive orders in cases within its jurisdiction" (Susan Webber v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, D. Mont. # 4:25-00026).

The Court of International Trade on April 16 held that it doesn't have jurisdiction under Section 1581(c) to hear claims from a group of importers that the Commerce Department failed to find a changed circumstance or open new shipper reviews in an antidumping duty investigation on Mexican tomatoes covering entries during 1995-96. Sustaining the agency's investigation results on remand, Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves also held that the intervenors don't have standing to sue, since their claims aren't related to those of the other parties with standing.