SCOTUS Bar on Nationwide Injunctions Won't Affect Trade, Attorneys Say
The Supreme Court's recent decision to eliminate nationwide injunctions won't impact the Court of International Trade, attorneys told us. The trade court is a court of national jurisdiction and will keep the right to issue nationwide injunctions for issues within its jurisdiction, the attorneys said.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
On June 27, the Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision, said that "universal" injunctions "likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has given to federal courts." The decision said injunctions should be "no broader than necessary to provide complete relief to each plaintiff with standing to sue."
John Peterson, partner at Neville Peterson, said CIT has nationwide jurisdiction and so will be able to issue nationwide injunctions, particularly in light of its duty to enforce "constitutional requirements that duties be levied uniformly throughout the United States."
To illustrate this point, Peterson noted the differences in the scope of relief offered by the trade court and the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in the two cases on the legality of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. CIT vacated the executive orders implementing the tariffs, while the D.C. court merely enjoined the collection of the tariffs from the two importers that filed suit.
Peterson said there likely will be "a lot more angling over which cases fall within the CIT's jurisdiction, as the court's national jurisdiction gives it greater power to stop, for example, parts of Trump's trade and tariff agenda."
Lawrence Friedman, partner at Barnes Richardson, agreed with Peterson on the effect of the ruling for trade cases, particularly given the "constitutional requirements that tariffs be uniformly applied." And while "CIT has followed the law giving a narrow reading to the uniformity clause, the history of the court and its predecessors shows the CIT plays a role nationally and not in any particular district," Friedman added, noting the court invoked the uniformity clause in the IEEPA case to impose a nationwide injunction.
Without a universal injunction, "CBP could apply tariffs inconsistently to different importers and different ports, which is not uniformity," Friedman said.
However, Friedman distinguished the availability of injunctive relief in trade cases from the availability of refunds. "That is a separate question of showing standing, statute of limitations, the amount of the claim, etc.," he said.