Trade Cases
Supreme Court Declines to Hear AIIS Tariff Challenge
Written by Sandy Williams
June 25, 2019
The Supreme Court on Monday rebuffed a challenge to the president’s use of Section 232 tariffs, declining to review a March CIT ruling.
In June 2018, the American Institute of International Steel and two of its member companies challenged the constitutionality of Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, charging the act provides the president too much discretionary control over tariffs and “violates the doctrine of separation of powers and checks and balances that the Constitution protects.”
In March, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of International Trade determined that the use by President Trump of Section 232 to impose aluminum and steel tariffs was legal. In their decision, however, the judges noted that Section 232 “seem[s] to invite the President to regulate commerce by way of means reserved for Congress.”
AIIS requested a three-judge panel due to a critical need for a resolution of the tariffs and to allow the decision to be appealed directly to the U.S. Supreme Court, bypassing the U.S. Court of Appeals.
The decision by the Supreme Court not to hear the case means the CIT decision will stand while the petitioners now take their challenge to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
AIIS acknowledge that it is rare for the Supreme Court to agree to hear a case before a ruling by the Court of Appeals.
“We continue to believe that we have a strong legal case that Section 232 is unconstitutional,” said AIIS President Richard Chriss. “Once the Federal Circuit has spoken, we expect that the losing party will ask the Supreme Court to review that decision.”
Challenges to Section 232 Continue in Congress
Lawmakers are jumping into the fight to regain control over trade policy, working to pass legislation that would limit the president’s use of Section 232. Senators Pat Toomey (R-PA) and Rob Portman (R-OH) have both introduced bills that would limit presidential trade authority.
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) plans to introduce a compromise bill that would be ready in the next few weeks. In a call to reporters earlier this month, Grassley acknowledged that “Congress has delegated too much authority to the president of the United States.
“There’s absolutely no constitutional crisis that this president or any other president has created,” he said. “The constitutional crisis comes from the elected representatives of the people over the last 80 years making a dictator out of the presidency…let’s say making a kingship out of the presidency of the United States.”
Grassley added that any such legislation would not be looked at favorably by the president and will need a strong vote on the floor of the Senate to pass.
Sandy Williams
Read more from Sandy WilliamsLatest in Trade Cases
Steel groups voice different takes on US-EU trade deal
US and European steel trade groups were at odds over their reaction to the recent trade deal President Trump brokered with the EU.
Here’s what’s up next in the big coated steel trade case
Attorneys representing domestic petitioners and foreign respondent companies have been busy filing case briefings and making rebuttals as the corrosion-resistant steel unfair trade investigations begin to wind down.
Price: Which countries get a ‘zonk’ in Trump’s primetime ‘Let’s Make a (Trade) Deal’ show?
As the president’s August 1 tariff deadline approaches, the “Let’s Make a Deal” game show returns to primetime (the Monty Hall version, of course). As the administration begins rolling out trade deals, we are starting to see what’s behind door number one and who is getting a “zonk.”
Trump says Canada deal might not happen: Report
President Trump said a negotiated deal with Canada might not occur, and all existing tariffs, along with those set to take effect soon, will stay in place, according to media reports.
Steel trade groups applaud Trump’s S232 tariffs
Five trade organizations involved with North American steel have praised President Trump’s Section 232 tariffs on steel for helping the domestic industry.