CAFC Rejects Trump-Aligned Legal Group's Proposed Amicus Reply Brief in IEEPA Tariff Suit
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on July 21 rejected a President Donald Trump-aligned amicus group's bid to file an additional amicus brief in the lead case on the legality of Trump's tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. In a per curiam order, all active judges on the court said the motion for leave to file an additional amicus brief "is denied as non-compliant with our scheduling order," which said all amicus briefs must be "filed on the same day as the principal brief of the party the amicus supports" (V.O.S. Selections v. Donald J. Trump, Fed. Cir. # 25-1812).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
The proposed brief, filed by the America First Policy Institute, was filed the same day as the government's reply in the IEEPA tariff case and further discussed the institute's argument that Trump's tariffs can also be upheld under Section 338, which lets the president impose tariffs on any country up to 50% "whenever the President shall find as a fact that any foreign country places any burden or disadvantage" on U.S. commerce (see 2507210048).
The institute initially made this argument in its accepted amicus brief, which was filed concurrent with the government's opening brief. In response, the plaintiffs, which comprise five importers and 12 U.S. states, and an amicus group made up of legal scholars and former government officials, challenged the institute's position (see 2507090056). The institute filed its proposed amicus brief to respond to those claims, arguing, among other things, that Section 338 had not been implicitly repealed and that the executive orders implementing the tariffs can be upheld under Section 338, despite the fact that the U.S. itself isn't asking them to be.