Retail and Vendor Business Groups Say Court Erred in China 301 Tariff Case

The Retail Litigation Center (RLC), the National Retail Federation. (NRF), the American Apparel & Footwear Association (AAFA), the Consumer Technology Association, the Footwear Distributors and Retailers of America (FDRA), and the Juvenile Products Manufacturers Association issued a joint statement on July 24 claiming that The Court of International Trade erred in the recent China Section 301 Tariff Case.

“The Court of International Trade’s (CIT) reasoning in its latest decision in the China Section 301 litigation is erroneous and must be reversed, the joint statement reads.

“Initially, the CIT correctly ruled that USTR failed to meet its statutory and fundamental duties under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) when they raced forward to impose these tariffs without responding to a single comment from American consumers and business. The CIT erred when it failed to vacate the illegally imposed tariffs and instead gave USTR a second chance to meet its legal obligations. On remand, once again, the agency failed to meet the core requirements of the APA. Instead of addressing the magnitude of legitimate concerns raised over the imposition of tariffs on virtually all imports from China, USTR switched gears and basically argued that the President made us do it. Shockingly, the CIT accepted this novel excuse.

“Pressure from the President doesn’t dissolve an agency from all other statutory obligations. As CIT explained in its first order, the President’s discretion is just one factor the agency is required to consider. It is not preponderant or the controlling authority over an agency’s decision-making obligations outlined in the APA.

“The APA demands that USTR justify the imposition of list 3 and list 4A tariffs. The agency has been given multiple chances to do so, and they continue to ignore all comments, concerns, and alternative options. This blatant disregard for the law cannot continue to go unchecked. It’s beyond time to impose the normal remedy for unlawful agency action and vacate the tariffs which are taxing American consumers and businesses, contributing to persistent inflation and burdening our supply chains. We urge The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to reverse judgment and finally vacate the list 3 and list 4A tariffs.”

The group filed an amicus brief in support of the challenge to List 3 and List 4A China Section 301 tariffs. Joseph Palmore and Joel Wacks of Morrison & Foerster, LLP prepared the brief.