The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit on March 17 affirmed the dismissal of steel importer JSW Steel (USA)'s suit against three U.S. steel makers, which alleged that the companies illegally conspired to "boycott JSW by refusing to supply it with specific, domestically produced steel slab" (JSW Steel (USA) Inc. v. Nucor Corp., 5th Cir. # 22-20149).
A State Department notice declaring that all agency efforts to control international trade now constitute a "foreign affairs function" of the U.S. under the Administrative Procedure Act will ultimately be subject to the discretion of the courts, trade lawyers told us.
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.
President Donald Trump will likely turn to Section 301 to enact his plans for "reciprocal" tariffs, various trade lawyers told Trade Law Daily. Following the president's announcement of his reciprocal tariff plan, which will purportedly tackle "non-reciprocal trading arrangements" with many of the U.S.'s trading partners starting April 2, speculation ensued as to the precise scope of the tariffs and their legal bases.
A North Carolina business owner pleaded guilty last week after trying to export accelerometer technology with military uses to China without a Bureau of Industry and Security license, DOJ said. David Bohmerwald, owner of the electronics resale business Components Cooper Inc., faces a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison
Raj Parekh, a DOJ lawyer who was named the Bureau of Industry and Security’s first chief of corporate enforcement in September (see 2409120007), is leaving BIS next week to join the law firm Sparacino, he announced on LinkedIn. Parekh said his departure from government is “entirely unrelated to current events,” adding that his one-year detail as the BIS corporate enforcement chief “would have continued if it were not for this unique opportunity in the private sector.”
President Donald Trump's recent expansion of Section 232 steel and aluminum tariffs likely would survive a judicial challenge, particularly in light of the string of cases challenging the Section 232 duties imposed during his first term, trade lawyers told us. Thomas Beline, partner at Cassidy Levy, said Trump's move to eliminate the country-specific arrangements and product exclusions is "likely defensible," since the statute lets the president take any action he deems necessary where an agreement is "not being carried out or is ineffective."
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.
Nathan Swinton is leaving DOJ to become the Bureau of Industry and Security's new chief counsel, he announced on LinkedIn. He was DOJ's senior counsel to the assistant attorney general for national security.
The Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) improperly rejected 63 Section 232 steel tariff exclusion requests filed by California-based importer Mirror Metals, the company argued in a Dec. 20 complaint at the Court of International Trade. Mirror Metals said that if BIS applied the standards laid out in its regulations, the "only reasonable conclusion" it could have drawn was that the company "cannot obtain the subject steel in the U.S. market in a sufficient quantity or quality, on a timely basis to replace the steel it currently imports" (Mirror Metals v. United States, CIT # 24-00260).