In a confidential opinion released Aug. 22, Court of International Trade Judge Timothy Reif vacated the Commerce Department’s pause on antidumping and countervailing duties on solar cells from Thailand, Cambodia, Vietnam and Malaysia -- in place until June 6, 2024 -- after a finding that the countries' exporters were circumventing an antidumping duty on solar cells from China (Auxin Solar v. United States, CIT # 23-00274).

In a reply brief, California said Aug. 18 that the U.S. had conceded the state’s challenge to President Donald Trump’s International Emergency Economic Powers Act tariffs “arises out of” the IEEPA. The government’s following argument, that it also arises from Trump’s recent executive orders modifying the Harmonized Tariff Schedule to implement the tariffs, fails because those orders weren’t authorized by a “law of the United States,” it said (State of California v. Donald J. Trump, 9th Cir. # 25-3493).

The Court of International Trade dismissed Aug. 21 a case brought by Canadian lumber exporter J.D. Irving in an attempt to secure a lower antidumping duty cash deposit rate for some of its entries.

Over opposition from the government, which said that the Court of International Trade didn't have the power to extend complaint deadlines, the trade court let honey exporters led by Ban Me Thout Honeybee file their complaint out of time in an order Aug. 15. The court said it would follow up its order with its reasoning in a later filing.

Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week, in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.

The Court of International Trade affirmed Aug. 11 the Commerce Department’s decision to, in an antidumping duty administrative review, reject Chinese solar cell exporter Yingli China’s separate rate application even though its U.S. sales were conducted through an affiliate, Yingli Green Energy Americas, with separate ownership.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Aug. 19 affirmed the Commerce Department’s decision to reject an exporter’s response to a separate rate questionnaire that had already been rescinded.

Importers' argument that the tariffs imposed using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act don't arise out of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the U.S. "strains the statutory text past the breaking point," the government argued in a reply brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (Learning Resources v. Donald J. Trump, D.C. Cir. # 25-5202).

The Commerce Department's failure to investigate and attribute subsidies received by respondent Antiqa Minerals' cross-owned affiliates and their suppliers in a countervailing duty investigation was unlawful, petitioner The Coalition for Fair Trade in Ceramic Tile argued in an Aug. 15 complaint at the Court of International Trade. Challenging the CVD investigation on ceramic tile from India, the coalition said Commerce's cross-ownership analysis of Antiqa was unsupported by substantial evidence (The Coalition for Fair Trade in Ceramic Tile v. United States, CIT # 25-00152).

The International Trade Commission urges an approach to the redaction of business proprietary information that "the law forbids," Alex Moss, executive director of the Public Interest Patent Law Institute, said in an Aug. 13 amicus brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a case on the commission's redaction policy. Moss said the ITC unlawfully asks the court to "redact judicial records at its request without requiring any justification" (In Re United States, Fed. Cir. #s 24-1566, 25-127).