CBP unlawfully detained 11 shipments of honey from importer Tri State Honey and held the entries for "nearly a year without explanation or justification," the importer argued in an April 29 complaint at the Court of International Trade. Seeking at least $4 million in damages along with attorney's fees, Tri State Honey said CBP violated its "due process rights" by failing to disclose the reasons for the detention of its honey and the evidence as to the honey's country of origin (Tri State Honey v. United States, CIT # 25-00080).
The U.S. District Court for the District Columbia set a hearing for May 27 to hear two children's educational materials producers' motion for a preliminary injunction against all tariff action taken by President Donald Trump under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. In a text-only order, Judge Rudolph Contreras set the hearing to take place at 3 p.m. EDT both on the preliminary injunction bid and the U.S. government's motion to transfer the case to the Court of International Trade (Learning Resources v. Donald J. Trump, D.D.C. # 25-01248).
Importer Mitsubishi Power Americas’ catalyst blocks were filters or purifiers and properly classified under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 8421, not “other” catalytic reactors under 3815, the Court of International Trade ruled April 29.
The U.S. offered its most fulsome defense of President Donald Trump's reciprocal tariffs to date, submitting a reply to a group of five importers' motion for a preliminary injunction and summary judgment at the Court of International Trade on April 29. The government argued that the text, context, history and purpose of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act lets the president impose tariffs and that IEEPA doesn't confer an unconstitutional delegation of authority to the president (V.O.S. Selections v. Donald J. Trump, CIT # 25-00066).
In a complaint brought April 28, importer Chamberlain Group said CBP wrongly found its entryway intercom and camera systems had originated from China, not Mexico (Chamberlain Group v. United States, CIT # 24-00198).
Two Illinois producers of children’s educational materials challenged April 22 President Donald Trump’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose tariffs, adding their complaint to a growing pile making similar claims (see 2504250038, 2504140061 and 2504230067). They, like other challengers, are seeking a preliminary injunction, saying that their businesses are already suffering irreparable harm as a result of the tariffs (Learning Resources, Inc. v. Donald J. Trump, D. D.C. # 25-01248).
Cable importer Cyber Power Systems brought two more classification disputes to the Court of International Trade April 28 (see 2504010067 and 2305170023 (Cyber Power Systems (USA) Inc. v. United States, CIT # 21-00199).
An environmental conservation group said April 25 in a motion for judgment that the National Marine Fisheries Service had again failed to reach a proper comparability finding regarding New Zealand’s fisheries threatening the existence of the Maui dolphin -- whose total population as a species has dwindled to under 50 (Maui and Hector's Dolphin Defenders v. National Marine Fisheries Service, CIT # 24-00218).
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.
Former U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, who served in that role in President Donald Trump's first term, told an audience at the Council on Foreign Relations that he thinks "there’s a reasonable chance the [Court of International Trade (CIT)] would enjoin" tariffs levied under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA. Trump used IEEPA to levy 25% tariffs on Canada and Mexico over fentanyl and migration, as well as 20% tariffs on China over fentanyl, and used it to levy 10% tariffs on countries other than those three, and an additional 125% tariffs on Chinese goods.