The European Commission opened a public consultation regarding a list of U.S. imports that could become subject to tariffs in response to the flurry of U.S. trade action, should talks with the White House fall through, the commission announced. The list covers over $107 billion worth of U.S. imports, including a "broad range of industrial and agricultural products," it said.
toarticlessource documents
Search Primer
Term list: Separate terms with spaces, not commas or semicolons.
Multi-word term: Place inside quotes to ensure an exact match (e.g. "surrogate value").
Acronyms: Use all capital letters to ensure the search is not looking for that letter sequence instead. (e.g., CIT).
Required term: If a term must be included in any resulting articles, prefix it with a plus sign (e.g., CBP +ruling).
Excluded term: If a term should be excluded from any articles being found, prefix it with a minus sign (e.g., ruling -NY).
Simplest form: Use the simplest form of a term (e.g. "russian export control" instead of "russian export controls") or "entity list" instead of "entity listing" or "entity listed").
President Donald Trump's reciprocal tariffs fail to satisfy the International Emergency Economic Powers Act's requirements by failing to identify an "unusual and extraordinary" threat in relying on "longstanding trade policy problems," 12 states, led by Oregon and Arizona, argued. Submitting a motion for a preliminary injunction against all tariffs imposed under IEEPA, the states also said the reciprocal tariffs, and the tariffs on China, Canada and Mexico, don't "deal with" the threats they identify (The State of Oregon v. Donald J. Trump, CIT # 25-00077).
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 on April 29 told the 12 states challenging President Donald Trump's tariff action taken under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act they may file a brief laying out their position on a group of five importers' motion for summary judgment against Trump's reciprocal tariffs by May 8. The court said in a text-only order that the brief, not to exceed 10,000 words, doesn't bar the states from filing their own motion at a later date, nor will the brief be construed as a "waiver or forfeiture of any claim or argument."
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).
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).
The Pacific Legal Foundation, the libertarian legal advocacy group that recently brought a case against the legality of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act on behalf of 11 importers, has had "preliminary" talks with the other advocacy groups that have brought cases challenging the tariffs on whether to proceed with separate cases. Molly Nixon, attorney at the foundation, told us she's "in touch" with the two other groups who have brought cases against the tariffs, the New Civil Liberties Alliance and the Liberty Justice Center, but that nothing is confirmed about whether the groups will combine cases.
A third case challenging President Donald Trump's use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act has been filed at the Court of International Trade by a group of 11 companies, most of which make tabletop games. The companies, led by clothing maker Princess Awesome LLC, argue that the IEEPA doesn't authorize tariffs, Trump's declared national emergencies fail to meet the "statutory requirement of an 'unusual and extraordinary threat'" and IEEPA unconstitutionally transfers legislative power to the president (Princess Awesome v. U.S. Customs and Border Protection, CIT # 25-00078).
The U.S. District Court for the District of Montana on April 25 transferred a case filed by four members of the Blackfeet Nation tribe challenging the tariffs on Canada issued under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to the Court of International Trade. Judge Dana Christensen held that two cases establishing the trade court's exclusive jurisdiction to hear cases arising out of the Trading With the Enemy Act, IEEPA's predecessor, confirm CIT's exclusive jurisdiction to hear cases involving IEEPA, given that IEEPA has the "same operative language as that contained in the TWEA" (Susan Webber v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, D.Mont. # 4:25-00026).
The U.S. said the Court of International Trade's recent decision denying five companies' application for a temporary restraining order against the "reciprocal" tariffs issued under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act affirms the trade court's exclusive jurisdiction to hear cases related to IEEPA tariffs. Filing a notice of supplemental authority in a case filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana challenging various IEEPA tariffs, the government said any decision from the Montana court to retain jurisdiction "would necessarily contradict" the trade court's decision (Susan Webber v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, D. Mont. # 4:25-00026).