The state of California opened a lawsuit in the District Court for the Northern District of California on April 16 against President Donald Trump's ability to use the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose tariffs. The two-count complaint claims that Trump acted beyond his statutory authority granted by IEEPA to impose the "reciprocal" tariffs and the tariffs on China, Canada and Mexico, and that Trump's tariff actions usurp legislative authority in violation of the U.S. Constitution (State of California v. Donald J. Trump, N.D. Cal. # 3:25-03372).
Five importers challenging the constitutionality of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act as a source of tariff-setting authority plan to file a motion for a preliminary injunction in the coming days, counsel for the companies told us. Jeffrey Schwab, senior counsel at the Liberty Justice Center, said the PI bid will request an injunction on the collection of all tariffs issued under the IEEPA.
The conservative Liberty Justice Center brought a lawsuit on behalf of five importers to challenge the constitutionality of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act as a source of tariff-setting authority. The complaint, filed April 14 at the Court of International Trade, makes two claims: President Donald Trump's "reciprocal" tariffs exceed the president's statutory authority under IEEPA and, even if this statutory authority exists, it's an "unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority" (V.O.S. Selections v. Donald J. Trump, CIT # 25-00066).
A group of five companies filed a complaint at the Court of International Trade challenging the president's authority to impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. The complaint, drafted by the conservative Liberty Justice Center, says President Donald Trump's use of IEEPA to impose "reciprocal" tariffs "exceeds his statutory authority." The lawsuit adds that even if IEEPA grants this authority, it amounts to an "unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority." The lawsuit is the third of its kind to challenge the use of IEEPA to impose tariffs but is the first to be filed at the trade court.
Counsel for two members of the Blackfeet Nation tribe that recently filed a lawsuit against the recent tariff action taken by President Donald Trump told us that she believes jurisdiction to be proper in the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana. Monica Tranel, the attorney for Montana state Sen. Susan Webber and rancher Jonathan St. Goddard, also said that she believes she can obtain a preliminary injunction against the spate of tariffs recently imposed on Canada due to the size of the harm to the agriculture and tourism industry in western Montana.
CBP improperly declined to accept the proper valuation of various iron and steel products imported by NOA Brands America, the importer argued in an April 10 complaint at the Court of International Trade (NOA Brands America v. United States, CIT # 23-00109).
CBP has released its April 9 Customs Bulletin (Vol. 59, No. 15). It contains the following ruling actions:
Members of the Senate Agriculture Committee on April 8 pressed Stephen Vaden, nominee for USDA deputy secretary, on how President Donald Trump's slew of tariff action will impact USDA and agriculture issues.
The Court of International Trade on April 8 rejected Georgia woman Skeeter-Jo Stoute-Francois' challenge to four questions on the October 2021 customs broker license exam. Judge Lisa Wang held that for three of the questions, Stoute-Francois formulated her own "factual scenarios" in arguing that there wasn't enough information to select the correct answer. For the remaining question, Wang said CBP's correct answer choice was backed by substantial evidence.
Singapore-headquartered Maxeon Solar Technologies is considering a challenge to CBP's decision to hold its solar panels for alleged non-compliance with the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act, it said in an April 4 news release. The company said that it is "considering exercising its right to contest CBP's decision at the U.S. Court of International Trade to demonstrate that Maxeon's legacy supply chains are fully UFLPA-compliant."