Conservative advocacy group the New Civil Liberties Alliance filed another lawsuit challenging the legality of the tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, arguing that IEEPA categorically doesn't allow for tariffs and that the tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump aren't "necessary" to address the declared emergencies. The alliance filed its suit on July 21 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas on behalf of outdoor cooking product maker FIREDISC, the Game Manufacturers Association and wood product maker Ryan Wholesale (FIREDISC, Inc. v. Donald J. Trump, W.D. Tex. # 25-01134).

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.

The Commerce Department adequately supported its de facto specificity finding regarding Indian state-run coal supplier Coal India's provision of coal to respondent Hindalco Inndustries for less than adequate remuneration, the Court of International Trade held in a July 22 decision. In the ruling, Judge Joseph Laroski also upheld Commerce's decision to use U.N. Comtrade data as a benchmark for calculating the size of the coal subsidy in the 2020-21 administrative review of the countervailing duty order on common alloy aluminum sheet from India.

Orange juice importers Johanna Foods and Johanna Beverage Company on July 22 asked the Court of International Trade to either temporarily, preliminarily or permanently enjoin the federal government from "imposing and enforcing" President Donald Trump's threatened 50% tariff on Brazil. Filing a combined application for a temporary restraining order and motions for a preliminary or permanent injunction, Johanna Foods and Johanna Beverage said the tariff isn't a proper exercise of either Section 301 or the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (Johanna Foods v. Executive Office of the President of the United States of America, CIT # 25-00155).

The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on July 18 stayed two importers' case against the legality of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, pending the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit's consideration of the appeal (Learning Resources v. Donald J. Trump, D.D.C. # 25-01248).

The Court of International Trade in a confidential July 21 decision remanded the Commerce Department's final results in the 2021-22 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on aluminum foil from China. Judge Claire Kelly said she intends to issue a public version of the decision on or shortly after July 25. The case was brought by various exporters to challenge Commerce's primary surrogate country choice of Romania in the review, along with the agency's selection of specific surrogate value data for various inputs (Jiangsu Dingsheng New Materials Joint-Stock Co. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00264).

Court of International Trade Judge Joseph Laroski held July 21 that importer Hanon Systems’ aluminum foil originated from China, not South Korea, sustaining a Commerce Department decision that analyzed the five mandatory factors in a country-of-origin analysis and found only two weighed in favor of China.

The Court of International Trade on July 22 sustained the Commerce Department's 2020-21 review of the countervailing duty order on common alloy aluminum sheet from India. Judge Joseph Laroski said Commerce's decisions to find that the provision of coal for less than adequate remuneration was de facto specific and to use U.N. Comtrade data as a benchmark in measuring the coal subsidy were supported by substantial evidence. The agency's specificity finding rested on the fact that respondent Hindalco, "like a typical utility provider, engages in 'power generation,'" and that two "power" industries "appear to use a substantial majority of the coal provided by" India's state-run coal supplier, Coal India.

The U.S. filed its reply brief in the lead case on the legality of President Donald Trump's tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, arguing, among other things, that the Court of International Trade doesn't have the power to issue a nationwide injunction vacating the tariffs and that IEEPA plainly allows the president to impose tariffs (V.O.S. Selections v. Donald J. Trump, Fed. Cir. # 25-1812).

The U.S. pushed back July 16 against exporter Soc Trang Seafood Joint Stock Co.’s challenge to the Commerce Department’s surrogate value calculation of Vietnamese land rental prices in a countervailing duty review (see 2501270012). The government said Commerce’s use of Thai data was supported by substantial evidence (Soc Trang Seafood Joint Stock Co. v. United States, CIT # 25-00030).