SCOTUS Gives US Extra Words for Reply Brief in IEEPA Tariff Cases
The Supreme Court on Sept. 24 granted the government's request for permission to use up to 3,000 additional words in its reply brief in the cases on the legality of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Chief Justice John Roberts approved the application for 9,000 total words (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.
Solicitor General D. John Sauer said the extra words are needed given that the government will have to address "three separate response briefs, with an additional jurisdictional issue, on a highly expedited schedule" (see 2509220042). The application came in the Supreme Court's consolidated cases on the legality of the IEEPA tariffs. One of the cases was filed by five importers and 12 U.S. states, while the other was filed by two small importers. The high court agreed to hear the cases on an expedited schedule, setting argument for Nov. 5 (see 2509180050).
The U.S. noted that its reply brief, which is due by Oct. 30, will have to respond to arguments from the plaintiffs in both cases. However, the five importers and 12 U.S. states will file their own briefs, since they have different counsel and different interests. The cases also raise the question of whether both actions should have been filed at the Court of International Trade, which has exclusive jurisdiction over cases arising out of U.S. laws that provide for tariffs.