The Commerce Department has published the final results of the antidumping duty administrative review on crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells from China (A-570-979). These final results will be used to set final assessments of AD duties on importers for subject merchandise entered Dec. 1, 2020, through Nov. 30, 2021.
The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices July 10 on AD/CVD proceedings:
The plaintiffs in the two consolidated cases against SB-419, Montana’s statewide TikTok ban, filed nearly simultaneous motions Thursday in U.S. District Court for Montana in Missoula for preliminary injunctions to block Attorney General Austin Knudsen (R) from enforcing the measure when it takes effect Jan. 1. U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy’s June 28 consolidation order (see 2306290041) designated the May 17 complaint (docket 9:23-cv-00056) filed by six Montana TikTok influencers and users as the lead case, and the May 22 complaint filed by TikTok (docket 9:23-cv-00061) as the "member" case.
The government faces “irreparable harm” with each day a preliminary injunction remains in effect preventing dozens of federal agencies from engaging in “a vast range of lawful and responsible conduct.” So said DOJ’s Thursday evening's memorandum (docket 3:22-cv-01213) in U.S. District Court for Western Louisiana in Monroe in support of the defendants’ motion to stay the injunction, pending appeal to the 5th U.S. Circut Court of Appeals. Judge Terry Doughty, a Donald Trump appointee, imposed the motion in an unusual July 4 ruling (see 2307050042).
Parties in Missouri v. Biden and non-movants in the similar Kennedy v. Biden First Amendment class action may respond by July 19 to Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s motion to consolidate his and Children’s Health Defense’s freedom of speech lawsuit, said a Wednesday minute entry (docket 3:23-cv-00381) signed by U.S. District Court Judge Terry Doughty for Western Louisiana in Monroe. Movants may respond by July 26. Kennedy, a Democratic candidate for president in 2024, moved in April for consolidation of the cases, describing the defendants and facts as “substantially identical (see 2304050007)". The Missouri and Louisiana class action alleges the Biden administration coerced and collaborated with social media companies to control public narrative about COVID-19 vaccine and mask mandates and results from the 2020 election. Kennedy and his Children’s Health Defense organization, “unlike in Missouri v. Biden, do not rest their claims on censorship of their own speech,” Kennedy said: “Rather, Plaintiffs have brought this case as (and on behalf of) social media users, whose right to an uncensored public square is being systematically violated.” Biden administration defendants “misunderstand this case,” said Kennedy in a Tuesday reply memorandum in support of Louisiana AG Jeff Landry (R) and Missouri AG Andrew Bailey’s (R) request for a preliminary injunction against most of the nearly 70 federal government defendants. "Plaintiffs need only show -- and the evidence before the Court clearly establishes -- that Defendants are deliberately 'induc[ing], encourage[ing], or promot[ing]' social media censorship of protected speech," Kennedy said, citing Norwood v. Harrison. If there's "'any fixed star in our constitutional constellation,' as the Supreme Court reaffirmed just days ago, 'it is the principle that the government may not interfere with an uninhibited marketplace of ideas,'” he said, referencing Creative v. Elenis. Doughty granted a preliminary injunction Tuesday to the AGs (see 2307050042) ordering certain departments and agencies to limit their communication with social media platforms; DOJ filed a notice of appeal Wednesday (see note, this issue).
The Commerce Department published notices in the Federal Register July 7 on the following AD/CV duty proceedings (any notices that announce changes to AD/CV duty rates, scope, affected firms or effective dates will be detailed in another ITT article):
The plaintiffs in the putative social media class action in U.S. District Court for Central California in Los Angeles (see 2301030036) contend the “landmark” preliminary injunction granted July 4 against federal officials by U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty for Western Louisiana in Monroe (see 2307050042) is “directly related to adjudicating” the viewpoint discrimination claims asserted in their own case, said their notice Wednesday (docket 2:22-cv-09438). Doughty’s injunction bars the federal officials from engaging in 10 forms of interactions with social media companies. DOJ filed notice Wednesday that it will appeal Doughty's injunction to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (see 2307050067). DOJ expects to expeditiously seek a stay of Doughty's ruling, said an official. Plaintiffs Richard Jackson, Julie Briggs and Gregg Buchwalter in the Los Angeles class action allege the Democratic National Committee and the Biden administration colluded to suppress and censor disfavored speakers, viewpoints and content on social media platforms.
The Commerce Department published the preliminary results of its antidumping duty administrative review on chlorinated isocyanurates from Spain (A-469-814). In the final results of this review, Commerce will set assessment rates for subject merchandise from the three companies under review entered June 2021 through May 2022.
The Biden administration will appeal a federal court ruling imposing a preliminary injunction on certain departments and agencies to limit their communication with social media platforms, said plaintiffs’ notice of appeal (docket 3:22-cv-01213) to the 5th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals Wednesday in U.S. District Court for Western Louisiana in Monroe. U.S. District Court Judge Terry Doughty granted Louisiana AG Jeff Landry (R) and Missouri AG Andrew Bailey’s (R) request for a preliminary injunction against most of the nearly 70 federal government defendants in Missouri v. Biden (see 2307050042). The freedom of speech class action alleges the Biden administration coerced and collaborated with social media companies to control public narrative about COVID-19 vaccine and mask mandates and results from the 2020 election. Under the injunction, most of the defendants are "enjoined and restrained" from 10 forms of interactions with social media companies. Top of the list is the requirement that they're not to meet with the companies "for the purpose of urging, encouraging, pressuring, or inducing in any manner the removal, deletion, suppression, or reduction of content containing protected free speech posted on social-media platforms," said the ruling. Expressly "not prohibited" by the injunction are eight forms of interactions involving criminal activity, national security or voter misinformation, Doughty’s order said. One guideline expressly doesn't bar the government defendants from contacting social media companies for the purpose of "exercising permissible public government speech promoting government policies or views on matters of public concern." DOJ expects to request a stay of the district court's decision "expeditiously.”
The Commerce Department published the preliminary results of its antidumping duty administrative review on certain quartz surface products from India (A-533-889). In the final results of this review, Commerce will set assessment rates for subject merchandise from the 40 companies remaining under review entered June 1, 2021, through May 31, 2022.