Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 may be a more limited "fall-back option" for the Trump administration should the Supreme Court strike down all the tariffs President Donald Trump has imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, Dr. Mona Paulsen, law professor at the London School of Economic Law School, wrote in a blog post.
The following lawsuit was filed recently at the Court of International Trade:
A group of solar cell importers and exporters asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to consolidate its appeal of a Court of International ruling vacating the Commerce Department's 2022-2024 duty pause on the collection of antidumping and countervailing duties on solar cells and modules from Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam with the government's appeal of the same order (Auxin Solar v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 25-2120).
Importer Danfoss on Nov. 6 moved the Court of International Trade to reopen its case on whether its scroll compressors and scroll-type compressors are exempt from Section 301 duties on China. The trade court dismissed the case on Nov. 4 for lack of prosecution (see 2511050053) (Danfoss LLC v. United States, CIT # 23-00214).
Three new lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade Nov. 6 on the legality of President Donald Trump's use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act as his authority to impose tariffs, on the day after the Supreme Court appeared skeptical about the validity of such tariffs. One suit was filed by three importers, led by Del Monte Fresh Produce and represented by customs lawyer Myron Barlow; another was filed by importer Turn5, represented by Crowell & Moring; and a third was filed by importer Netuno USA by trade lawyer Vinicius Adam (Del Monte Fresh Produce v. United States, CIT # 25-00244) (Netuno USA v. Donald J. Trump, CIT # 25-00245) (Turn5 v. U.S. Customs and Border Protection, CIT # 25-00246).
Various members of the trade bar speculated that the president's tariff authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act may face serious limits once the Supreme Court issues a decision in the lead cases on President Donald Trump's IEEPA tariffs. Following a Nov. 5 oral argument in which many of the justices appeared skeptical of Trump's sweeping use of the IEEPA to impose tariffs, many lawyers have said change may be coming in the world of trade.
The Court of International Trade on Nov. 4 granted importer Camel Energy's motion to expedite its case against CBP's detention of two of its battery entries. Judge Claire Kelly, who was assigned to the case on Oct. 29, granted the motion to expedite and said that Camel Energy "may file a proposed briefing schedule" along with a "brief statement of reasons as to why this expedited timeframe is necessary" by Nov. 5 at 4 p.m. ET (Camel Energy v. United States, CIT # 25-00230).
Two Trump appointees, along with the three liberal justices, had sharp questions for the Trump administration's advocate as the Supreme Court held a nearly three-hour hearing on the constitutionality of tariffs imposed around the world under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.
Nico Gurian, former trial attorney at DOJ's international trade field office, has joined antitrust firm Simonsen Sussman as an associate, the firm announced. Gurian joined DOJ in February 2024 after working as an associate at antitrust firm Getnick Law.
The following lawsuit was filed recently at the Court of International Trade: