Sign in Subscribe

Topic

Section 232

27 posts

The CIT Opinion in the Section 232 Constitutionality Case

The opinion is here. The court rejected the plaintiffs' argument that Section 232 is unconstitutional. Here is a key part of the reasoning: Most importantly for the challenge here, in Algonquin, the Supreme Court found that section 232 “easily” met the intelligible principle standard because [i]t establishes clear

Panels Composed in the Section 232/Retaliation Cases

For the nine panels established to hear the complaints against the Section 232 measures, the panels have all been composed with the same panelists, as follows: Elbio Rosselli (Uruguay) Esteban Conejos (Philippines) Rodrigo Valenzuela (Chile) For DSC subscribers, you can click the link to see which past cases each has

CIT Hearing on the Constitutionality of Section 232

Last Wednesday, the U.S. Court of International Trade held a hearing on the constitutional challenge to Section 232 (background on the complaint is here). The full transcript is here. There were lots of interesting exchanges. Here are a few snippets: HON. GARY S. KATZMANN: Can I -- Mr. Morrison, 6

What Is the Value of the Section 232 Auto Tariff Carveout?

In a side letter to the U.S.-Mexico agreement that is part of the NAFTA renegotiation, it appears that the U.S. has agreed that if it imposes tariffs on auto imports pursuant to Section 232, a certain amount of Mexican auto imports will be exempt. (You could also

The Constitutional Claim Against Section 232

Following up on their complaint, this is from a Motion for Summary Judgment filed by the American Institute for International Steel and two companies last week: SECTION 232 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AS AN IMPROPER DELEGATION OF LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY AND A VIOLATION OF SEPARATION OF POWERS. Plaintiffs’ nondelegation challenge to section 232

Deciding Whether the Section 232 Tariffs Are Safeguard Measures

So far, there have been 13 WTO consultations requests related to the Section 232 tariffs and the subsequent retaliation. Here are the 8 requests against the Section 232 tariffs, which allege violations of the GATT, and also allege that the tariffs are safeguard measures and violate the Safeguards Agreement: U.

Is Section 232 Unconstitutional?

This is from a recently filed complaint at the U.S. Court of International Trade: Plaintiffs American Institute for International Steel, Inc. (“AIIS”), Sim-Tex LP (“Sim-Tex”), and Kurt Orban Partners, LLC (“Orban”), by and through their attorneys, hereby submit their complaint in this action seeking a declaratory judgment

Canada's "As Such" Complaint Against Section 232

This is from Canada's consultations request on the Section 232 tariffs: In addition, Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 and its associated regulations appear to be "as such" inconsistent with Articles I:1 and II:1 of the GATT 1994 and does not

How Many WTO Members Will Argue that the Section 232 Steel/Aluminum Tariffs are Safeguard Measures?

China already made the argument that the Section 232 steel/aluminum tariffs are actually safeguard measures, both in a Safeguards Agreement consultations request and a DSU consultations request. Now both the EU and India have filed Safeguards Agreement consultations requests based on this same argument. The EU says the following

China's WTO Complaint against the Section 232 Tariffs

This is the legal basis of China's WTO complaint against the U.S. Section 232 tariffs, filed on April 5: The measures at issue, operating separately or together, appear to be inconsistent with the United States' obligations under: * Articles XIX:1(a), XIX:2 of the GATT