The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California pushed forward, in a text-ony order, its hearing on whether to transfer the state of California's case against all tariff action imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to the Court of International Trade. The hearing will now take place on May 27 at 1:30 p.m. EST (State of California v. Donald J. Trump, N.D. Cal. # 3:25-03372).

The Court of International Trade assigned the third major challenge to tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to the same three-judge panel consisting of Judges Jane Restani, Gary Katzmann and Timothy Reif. The case at issue, brought on behalf of 11 importers by libertarian advocacy group Pacific Legal Foundation, was brought to challenge President Donald Trump's reciprocal tariffs and tariffs imposed on China for the fentanyl emergency (see 2504250038). The suit will now be heard by the same three judges hearing lawsuits against the IEEPA tariffs brought by another libertarian group and 12 U.S. states (Princess Awesome v U.S. CBP, CIT # 25-00078).

The following lawsuit was filed recently at the Court of International Trade:

Importer Spector & Co. asked the Court of International Trade for relief from an order dismissing the case for lack of prosecution. The trade court dismissed the case, which is challenging CBP's classification of Spector's notebooks under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 4820.10.20.60, since the suit was added to the customs case management calendar and not removed before the expiration of the "applicable period of time of removal" (see 2505050001) (Spector & Co. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00087).

The U.S. on May 12 opposed four members of the Blackfeet Nation tribe's bid for an injunction against tariffs imposed on Canada under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, pending the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit's resolution of the tribal members' appeal of a Montana district court's order transferring the case to the Court of International Trade (Susan Webber v. U.S. Dep't of Homeland Sec., 9th Cir. # 25-2717).

The U.S. filed a second motion for default judgment against importer Rayson Global and its owner, Doris Cheng, in a customs penalty case after the Court of International Trade rejected the first bid for default judgment for failing to support its claim for a nearly $3.4 million penalty. In its second attempt to secure default judgment, the U.S. defended its claim that the merchandise at issue is valued at nearly $3.4 million (United States v. Rayson Global, CIT # 23-00201).

The Israeli government moved for judgment May 9 in the Court of International Trade in its case challenging the International Trade Commission’s final injury determinations regarding brass rod antidumping and countervailing duty investigations. The commission failed to consider the impact of Israel’s conflict with the terrorist group Hamas on Israel’s sole brass rod manufacturer, it said (Government of Israel v. United States, CIT # 24-00197).

Aegis Security, a customs broker involved in two U.S.-brought suits to collect duties that have gone unpaid for decades (see 2503030043 and 2504180051), moved May 8 for a more definite complaint in one. In the more recent complaint filed this year, Aegis said the government failed to provide an adequately detailed explanation of the facts behind its claim (United States v. Aegis Security Insurance Co., CIT # 25-00051).

The following lawsuit was filed recently at the Court of International Trade:

A number of importers self-describing as “small businesses in various fields” and led by Princess Awesome, a girls’ clothing seller, added a third amicus curiae brief to the growing number opposing President Donald Trump’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to levy tariffs (see 2505120057 and 2504240028). They said they filed to “emphasize the irreparable harm caused by the President’s arbitrary and ever-changing tariff policy” (V.O.S. Selections v. Donald J. Trump, CIT # 25-00066).