The U.S. filed its opening brief at the Supreme Court on Sept. 19 in the lead cases on the legality of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Solicitor General D. John Sauer said the reciprocal tariffs and tariffs on China, Canada and Mexico meant to stop the flow of fentanyl are a valid exercise of IEEPA, adding that the tariffs are a proper expression of presidential policymaking in emergency situations.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit will consider Nebraska man Byungmin Chae's appeal regarding one question on the April 2018 customs broker license exam without holding oral argument, according to a Sept. 19 notice from the court. The court said the case will be submitted to a three-judge panel on the court who will decide the appeal on the briefs only (Chae v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 25-1379).
The U.S. agreed to classify importer Robert Bosch's human machine interface controllers under the duty-free Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading of 8517.62.00, according to a stipulated judgment filed at the Court of International Trade on Sept. 19. CBP initially classified the human machine interface controllers under HTS subheading 8543.70.99, which is dutiable at 2.6% and covers other electrical machines and apparatus, having individual functions and not specified elsewhere in the chapter. Subheading 8517.62.00 provides for "Machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice, images or other data, including switching and routing apparatus" (Robert Bosch v. United States, CIT # 20-00028).
Solar cell importers and exporters, led by the American Clean Power Association, moved the Court of International Trade on Sept. 18 to stay its ruling vacating the Commerce Department's 2022-2024 duty "pause" on the collection of antidumping and countervailing duties on solar cells and modules from Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam (Auxin Solar v. United States, CIT # 23-00274).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Sept. 16 proposed amending seven of its practice rules and four practice notes to its rules. The court said public comments on the proposed changes are due by Oct. 16. If approved, the amendments would take effect on Dec. 1.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Sept. 18 issued its mandate in an antidumping duty case. The mandate comes after the court sustained the Commerce Department's non-market economic policy in AD proceedings despite the fact that the agency hadn't codified the policy in its regulations at the time the underlying review was challenged (see 2507280046). The court said its long line of cases upholding the policy confirms its validity, adding that, even if those cases didn't exist, the NME policy is an evidentiary presumption, which doesn't require notice-and-comment rulemaking (Jilin Forest Industry Jinqiao Flooring Group v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-2245).
The Supreme Court set oral argument for the lead cases on the legality of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act for Nov. 5, part of an attempt to hear the cases on an expedited basis (Donald J. Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, U.S. 25-250) (Learning Resources v. Donald J. Trump, U.S. 24-1287).
The standing up by DOJ of the Trade Fraud Task Force indicates the Trump administration is pouring significantly more resources and attention into prosecuting tariff evasion and customs fraud, and will use the various criminal and civil enforcement tools at their disposal, various attorneys said.
The Supreme Court will consider various Blackfeet Nation members' motion to intervene in the lead cases on the legality of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act at its Oct. 10 conference (Donald J. Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, U.S. 25-250) (Learning Resources v. Donald J. Trump, U.S. 24-1287).
The Supreme Court said that any motions relating to the oral argument in the lead cases on the legality of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act shall be filed on or before Oct. 3. The high court previously granted an expedited briefing schedule in the case, declaring that argument will be heard the first week of November (see 2509090058). Thus far, only one motion related to the argument has been filed, and it came from litigants in a separate case on IEEPA tariffs currently before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, seeking to intervene in the Supreme Court cases (see 2509100058) (Donald J. Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, U.S. 25-250) (Learning Resources v. Donald J. Trump, U.S. 24-1287).