Supreme Court Rejects Blackfeet Nation Members' Intervention Bid in IEEPA Tariff Cases
The Supreme Court on Oct. 14 denied four members of the Blackfeet Nation's attempt to intervene in the lead cases on the legality of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (Donald J. Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, U.S. 25-250) (Learning Resources v. Donald J. Trump, U.S. 24-1287).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
Monica Tranel, counsel for the Blackfeet Nation members, asked for leave to take part in the high court's Nov. 5 oral argument session on the IEEPA tariffs, arguing that her claim that the president can't impose tariffs on Native Americans isn't "addressed by the other parties" in the lead cases (see 2509290032). The two cases the Supreme Court is reviewing center on whether IEEPA can be used to impose tariffs at all and, if so, whether that power covers President Donald Trump's reciprocal tariffs and tariffs to address fentanyl trafficking (see 2509180050).
Tranel told us that she's "disappointed" in the high court's decision, since the "tribal commerce piece of this is a really critical part of the whole tariff issue."
The Blackfeet Nation members launched their own case challenging the legality of IEEPA tariffs as well as contesting the imposition of Section 232 and IEEPA tariffs on Native Americans. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit recently held oral argument in the members' case on whether a Montana court properly transferred the action to the Court of International Trade (see 2509170074).