SCOTUS to Mull Blackfeet IEEPA Litigants' Intervention Bid at Oct. 10 Conference
The Supreme Court will consider various Blackfeet Nation members' motion to intervene in the lead cases on the legality of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act at its Oct. 10 conference (Donald J. Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, U.S. 25-250) (Learning Resources v. Donald J. Trump, U.S. 24-1287).
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 tribal members, whose own case on the IEEPA tariffs is pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, argued that there's good cause for them to intervene in the lead cases, since their claims overlap with the claims from the existing parties and their case raises questions about "fundamental" constitutional principles and a unique body of federal Indian law (see 2509100058). In addition to the claims against the IEEPA tariffs advanced by the existing parties, the Blackfeet Nation members are arguing that the tariffs imposed on the tribal members violate the Indian Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution and the Jay Treaty of 1794.
The U.S. opposed the members' intervention, claiming that the tribal members haven't established a significant "legal 'interest'" in the litigation that the existing parties won't adequately represent (see 2509110059). Their claims regarding how the tariffs impact indigenous tribes "may be vindicated in their own suit challenging the tariffs" and don't give the tribal members "a cognizable protectable interest in this case that would warrant intervention," the government said.
If the intervention motion is granted at the Oct. 10 conference, it would allow the members to reply to the government's opening brief, since reply briefs are due Oct. 20 under the high court's expedited briefing schedule.