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 Supreme Court on Sept. 9 agreed to hear two cases on the legality of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and to do so on an expedited basis. The court set a briefing schedule that would conclude by Oct. 30 and set argument for the first week of November (Donald J. Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, U.S. 25-250) (Learning Resources v. Donald J. Trump, U.S. 24-1287).
The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York:
The following lawsuit was filed recently at the Court of International Trade:
Detroit Axle, the company challenging President Donald Trump's decision to eliminate the de minimis threshold on goods from China, moved to set aside the Court of International Trade's stay of its case pending the lead suit on tariff action taken under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. The company said while the relief it's seeking initially overlapped with the relief sought by the plaintiffs in the lead tariff suit, that's "no longer the case" in light of Trump's recent executive order rescinding the de minimis threshold globally (Axle of Dearborn d/b/a Detroit Axle v. United States, CIT # 25-00091).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit refused to stay two cases on the legality of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. The U.S. asked for a stay in both appeals, one brought by the State of California and the other by members of the Blackfeet Nation indigenous tribe, following the government's request for the Supreme Court to review a separate case on the tariffs.
The Supreme Court agreed to hear two cases, on an expedited basis, concerning the legality of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Briefing will conclude by Oct. 30 and the consolidated cases will be heard the first week of November. The high court decided to consolidate two cases on the issue, one of which was fully before the court on the merits following the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's ruling that the reciprocal tariffs and tariffs on China, Canada and Mexico to combat the flow of fentanyl went beyond the president's authority in IEEPA. The second case, which was pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, was exclusively on whether IEEPA categorically allows for tariffs.
The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York:
The U.S. asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit to stay two appeals on the legality of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act in light of the government's petition for writ of certiorari before the Supreme Court in a separate case on the tariffs. The U.S. said "it would be a waste of judicial resources for this Court to hear and decide this case before the Supreme Court has resolved the proceedings before it," in light of the "rapid schedule" proposed before the high court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's recent "unanimous ruling on jurisdiction."
The Court of International Trade ruled Aug. 13, in a decision made public Sept. 5, that exporter BASF Corp.’s food additive Betatene was properly classified under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 2106 as a dietary supplement.