The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Aug. 29 said the president doesn't have unlimited tariff authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Seven of the court's 11 total justices presiding over the case affirmed the Court of International Trade's conclusion that President Donald Trump's reciprocal tariffs and tariffs on China, Canada and Mexico meant to combat the flow of fentanyl exceed the president's authority under IEEPA.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Aug. 29 said President Donald Trump exceeded his authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act by imposing the reciprocal tariffs and tariffs on China, Canada and Mexico to combat the flow of fentanyl. Declining to address whether IEEPA categorically provides for tariffs, though spilling much ink on the topic, a majority of the court held that IEEPA doesn't confer unbounded tariff authority (V.O.S. Selections v. Donald J. Trump, Fed. Cir. #s 25-1812, -1813).
Fariha Kabir, a former international trade litigation attorney at CBP, has left the agency to join Faegre Drinker as an associate, she announced on LinkedIn. Kabir had worked at CBP since 2021, helping with the litigation of customs matters before the Court of International Trade and U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, including cases on tariff classification and value, the exclusion or detention of import entries, and CBP regulations.
CBP has released two Customs Bulletins. The Aug. 20 Customs Bulletin (Vol. 59, No. 34) contains a modification of two ruling letters and revocation of treatment relating to the tariff classification of dimmers.
Importer Cozy Comfort filed its opening brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Aug. 25, arguing that the Court of International Trade was wrong to find that the company's product, The Comfy, is a pullover and not a blanket (Cozy Comfort v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 25-1889).
The Court of International Trade on Aug. 26 vacated the National Marine Fisheries Service's comparability findings on New Zealand's West Coast North Island multispecies set-net and trawl fisheries, though the court declined to compel NMFS to issue an import ban on fish and fish products from these fisheries under the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA).
CBP improperly classified certain toy lips as candy under Harmonized Tariff Schedule Chapter 17 instead of "other toys" under Chapter 95, said importer Imaginings, doing business as Flix Candy, in a complaint last week at the Court of International Trade. Flix said that while the lips consist of two components, the plastic lips and a candy lollipop, the lips give the item its "essential character" and thus qualify the goods for Chapter 95 classification (Imaginings 3, d/b/a Flix Candy v. United States, CIT # 21-00403).
In a confidential opinion released Aug. 22, Court of International Trade Judge Timothy Reif vacated the Commerce Department’s pause on antidumping and countervailing duties on solar cells from Thailand, Cambodia, Vietnam and Malaysia -- in place until June 6, 2024 -- after a finding that the countries' exporters were circumventing an antidumping duty on solar cells from China (Auxin Solar v. United States, CIT # 23-00274).
Court of International Trade Judge Timothy Reif on Aug. 22 vacated the Commerce Department’s pause on antidumping and countervailing duties on solar cells from Thailand, Cambodia, Vietnam and Malaysia -- in place until June 6, 2024 -- after a finding that the countries' exporters were circumventing an antidumping duty on solar cells from China (Auxin Solar v. United States, CIT # 23-00274).
The U.S. is using "magical thinking" as the basis for its defense in the case against the legality of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, said Rick Woldenberg, CEO of Hand2Mind and Learning Resources, the plaintiffs in the suit currently at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.