Last night, the US Court of International Trade (CIT) issued a unanimous ruling in the case against Trump's "Liberation Day" tariffs filed by Liberty Justice Center and myself on behalf of five US businesses harmed by the tariffs. The ruling also covers the related case filed by twelve states led by Oregon. See my summary and discussion of the ruling here.
As expected, the Trump Administration is appealing the decision to the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the appellate court with jurisdiction over appeals from the CIT. Today, the Federal Circuit issued an "administrative stay" temporarily blocking the CIT ruling. This is not an indefinite stay blocking the CIT injunction for as long as it takes to complete the appellate process. Rather, an administrative stay is just a brief temporary block imposed while the issue of whether a more permanent stay pending appeal should be implemented gets litigated. I anticipate that process will take no more than two or three weeks. To put it different way, this is a brief temporary stay intended to give the court time to consider whether a longer stay should be imposed.
We and the plaintiffs in the Oregon case intend to oppose the government's motion to impose an indefinite stay, and we think we have strong arguments against it.
The difference between administrative stays and regular stays pending appeal is one of those confusing technicalities that makes ordinary people hate lawyers. I'm a law professor, and I find it annoying myself. I have tried to explain it as best I can. If you want a more detailed explanation, see this article by University of Virginia law Prof. Rachel Bayefsky.
I will have more to say about the case soon!
The post Federal Circuit Issues Brief Administrative Stay in Our Tariff Case appeared first on Reason.com.
