Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, the Supreme Court eliminated the judicial practice of deferring to federal agencies' interpretations of ambiguous statutes. The decision stands as a watershed moment in administrative law, handing much more power to the judiciary where it is asked to review agency decisions. Trade law is not exempt from the ruling, with judges at the Court of International Trade and Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit increasingly being asked to interpret the relevant statutes, taking discretion away from the Commerce Department and CBP.  

">
Trade Law Daily is a service of Warren Communications News.
Subscriber Login

Statutory Interpretation

In Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, the Supreme Court eliminated the judicial practice of deferring to federal agencies' interpretations of ambiguous statutes. The decision stands as a watershed moment in administrative law, handing much more power to the judiciary where it is asked to review agency decisions. Trade law is not exempt from the ruling, with judges at the Court of International Trade and Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit increasingly being asked to interpret the relevant statutes, taking discretion away from the Commerce Department and CBP.  

to
articlessource documents
Refine Topic Search
Clear Terms

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. "China import").

Acronyms: Use all capital letters to ensure the search is not looking for that letter sequence instead.

Required term: If a term must be included in any resulting articles, prefix it with a plus sign (e.g., +CBP).

Excluded term: If a term should be excluded from any articles being found, prefix it with a minus sign (e.g., -ruling).

Singular form: Always use the singular form when doing multi-word terms (e.g. "russian export control" instead of "russian export controls").

Shortest word form: When you have different word forms in a quoted (multi-word) term, you want to only include the shortest version if it is the last part of the expression (e.g., "entity list" instead of "entity listing" or "entity listed").

Cato Institute Urges CAFC to Ignore 'Maple Leaf' Standard in Suit on Revocation of Tariff Exclusion
January 26, 2024 by Jacob Kopnick|Top News

Libertarian think tank Cato Institute asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit for leave to file an amicus brief in support of a group of solar panel exporters' bid to have the court revisit its ruling sustaining President Donald Trump's revocation of a tariff exclusion on bifacial solar panels (Solar Energy Industries Association v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 22-1392).

Topics:Country of origin cases, Statutory Interpretation
High Court Weighs Ditching 'Chevron' Deference, Trade Bar Mulls Consequences
January 19, 2024 by Jacob Kopnick|Top News

The Supreme Court heard oral argument on Jan. 17 in a pair of cases contesting the Chevron doctrine, under which deference is afforded to executive agencies in interpreting federal laws where there is ambiguity. Many of the justices appeared primed to strike down the doctrine, including Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, Samuel Alito and John Roberts, who either criticized its use or questioned its current relevancy and impact (Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, Sup. Ct. # 22-451) (Relentless v. Dept. of Commerce, Sup. Ct. # 22-1219).

Topics:Court of International Trade activity, Statutory Interpretation
Solar Panel Exporters Challenge CAFC's Use of 'Maple Leaf' Standard, Ask for Full Court Rehearing
January 16, 2024 by Jacob Kopnick|Top News

Solar panel exporters, led by the Solar Energy Industries Association, urged the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to rehear their case on President Donald Trump's decision to revoke a Section 201 tariff exclusion on bifacial solar panels (Solar Energy Industries Association v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 22-1392).

Topics:Court of International Trade activity, Differential Pricing Analysis, UFLPA Entity List Litigation, Statutory Interpretation