The Court of International Trade sustained the Commerce Department's second remand results in a case on the 2019 administrative review of the countervailing duty order on hot-rolled steel flat products from South Korea, in a confidential decision. Judge Mark Barnett gave the parties until Sept. 29 to review the confidential information in the decision. In the remand results, Commerce said the Korean government's full allotment of emissions permits under the Korean Emissions Trading System was de facto specific, switching its previous determination that the full allotment was de jure specific following a remand order from Barnett (see 2407310039). Opening the record on remand, the agency added new data to the record and, with this data, said 504 companies got the full 100% allotment of the permits and that over 787,000 companies operated in Korea in 2019, meaning the program can't be considered "widely used" throughout the economy (Hyundai Steel Co. v. United States, CIT # 22-00170).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit on Sept. 23 set aside part of the Federal Maritime Commission's rule limiting the parties against whom "demurrage and detention" fees may be assessed. Judges Sri Srinivasan, Robert Wilkins and J. Michelle Childs held that the commission arbitrarily and capriciously exempted motor carriers from being assessed these fees, given the FMC's "stated rationale" to confine fees to parties who are in a "contractual relationship with the billing party."
CBP failed to explain its finding that Dominican exporter Kingtom Aluminio made its aluminum extrusions with forced labor, the Court of International Trade held on Sept. 23. Vacating and remanding the forced labor finding, Judge Timothy Reif said the agency failed to "articulate a satisfactory explanation for its action” based on a “rational connection between the facts found and the choice made" in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act's arbitrary and capricious standard.
Four amicus briefs were filed at the Supreme Court on Sept. 23 in defense of President Donald Trump's ability to levy tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. The briefs focused on various elements of the case, though they all argued that the nondelegation doctrine shouldn't be used to strip the president of his tariff authority here, since the court has long upheld broad delegations of authority to the president in the realms of foreign affairs and national defense (Donald J. Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, U.S. 25-250) (Learning Resources v. Donald J. Trump, U.S. 24-1287).
Two Chinese nationals were recently sentenced to lengthy prison sentences for importing fentanyl precursor chemicals and money laundering through Wuhan-based chemical manufacturer Amarvel Biotech, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York announced last week. Qingzhou Wang, who operated as Amarvel's principal executive, was sentenced Sept. 18 to 25 years in prison, while Yiyi Chen, the company's marketing manager, was sentenced last month to 15 years.
The U.S. asked the Supreme Court for permission to use an additional 3,000 words in its reply brief in the cases on the legality of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Solicitor General D. John Sauer said a total of 9,000 words is needed given that the government will have to address "three separate response briefs, with an additional jurisdictional issue, on a highly expedited schedule" (Donald J. Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, U.S. 25-250) (Learning Resources v. Donald J. Trump, U.S. 24-1287).
Corey Biazzo, a Charlotte-based civil litigation attorney, filed an amicus brief before the Supreme Court on Sept. 21 in opposition to tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Biazzo's submission is the first amicus brief filed in the case on the merits and argues that President Donald Trump's claimed tariff authority violates separation of powers principles (Donald J. Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, U.S. 25-250) (Learning Resources v. Donald J. Trump, U.S. 24-1287).
The Court of International Trade on Sept. 22 declined to reconsider its customs case finding importer BASF's fish oil ethyl ester concentrates are classified as "extract of fish" under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 1603. While the government said the court ignored that fish extracts must have similar characteristics to meat extracts and BASF's stipulation that its preparations aren't fatty acids, Judge Joseph Laroski said he explicitly considered both arguments.
The U.S. filed its opening brief at the Supreme Court on Sept. 19 in the lead cases on the legality of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Solicitor General D. John Sauer said the reciprocal tariffs and tariffs on China, Canada and Mexico meant to stop the flow of fentanyl are a valid exercise of IEEPA, adding that the tariffs are a proper expression of presidential policymaking in emergency situations.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit will consider Nebraska man Byungmin Chae's appeal regarding one question on the April 2018 customs broker license exam without holding oral argument, according to a Sept. 19 notice from the court. The court said the case will be submitted to a three-judge panel on the court who will decide the appeal on the briefs only (Chae v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 25-1379).