International Economic Law and Policy Blog

Sign in Subscribe

Topic

IEEPA

9 posts

The Section 301 Surge Continues: Investigating the Adoption/Enforcement/Administration of Forced Labor Import Bans

This Section 301 investigation intends to pressure all sixty named trade partners (even, inexplicably, including Canada and Mexico) to adopt similar enforcement procedures. This announcement is highly problematic for the four reasons I address below.

Is Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act a Fall-Back Option for Trump to Impose Tariffs?

Without IEEPA authority, as we have all discussed, where there is a will, there is a way. In all likelihood, this way involves the expanded use of other statutory authorities, such as Section 232 of the 1962 Trade Expansion Act and Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974. In

Roundup of IEEPA Hearing Commentary

I listened to today's Supreme Court hearing on the IEEPA tariff cases, but it was clear to me that I am not well-positioned to offer good insights on how the Court might rule. (The transcript is here if anyone wants to give this kind of tea leaf reading a shot themselves).

What to Expect When You’re Expecting a Trade Deal

There is widespread speculation about trade agreements that may be coming in the next 10 days (or soon after), including their form and what they might contain. What should we expect? The most reliable rumors are that some agreements have been drafted and are likely to be announced by the

Initial thoughts on V.O.S. Selections v. U.S. (Court of International Trade per curiam, 5/28/25)

In a clear and decisive opinion, the CIT has struck down as unlawful the tariffs imposed by President Trump under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) (i) worldwide to “retaliate” for purported balance of trade reasons against alleged trade barriers imposed by other states, and (ii) on Canada, Mexico,

CIT grants IEEPA Plaintiffs' MSJ; Vacates and permanently enjoins all IEEPA tariffs

A unanimous panel (Katzmann, Reif, Restani) of the Court of International Trade has granted Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment and injunctive relief in the V.O.S. Selections et al. and State of Oregon et al. challenges to all three sets of President Trump's IEEPA tariffs (worldwide/

More on Charming Betsy

In my last post, I raised the possibility that Charming Betsy could play a role in the challenges to the Trump administration's IEEPA tariffs. (There have been three new complaints filed since that post: State of Oregon v. Trump, Learning Resources v. Trump, and Princess Awesome v. CBP.

The IEEPA Lawsuits and Charming Betsy

By my count, so far there have been five lawsuits filed in U.S. court related to either the IEEPA fentanyl tariffs or the IEEPA "reciprocal"/universal tariffs: - Barnes v. U.S., CIT (complaint) (fentanyl tariffs) - Emily Ley Paper v. Trump, U.S. district court, N.

Collective Economic Security

Collective Economic Security By Mona Paulsen (LSE Law) and Dan Ciuriak (C.D. Howe (Senior Fellow)) With a flurry of pomp and circumstance, the second Trump administration has reset United States trade with its trading partners. Based on U.S. laws that afford wide Executive discretion towards trade actions owing