U.S. Supreme Court rejects challenging steel import tariffs

The U.S. Supreme Court on June 22 refused to hear a Section 232 dispute on steel import tariffs filed by the American International Steel Institute, which alleges that tariffs imposed by the administration of President Donald Trump in March 2018 violate the U.S. constitution.

Following the February ruling by the US Court of Appeals against the federal district supporting the tariffs, AIIS again asked the Supreme Court to intervene. The US Supreme Court previously refused to consider challenging the group's tariffs in June 2019.
In June 2018, AMIS and two of its members filed a lawsuit, constitutionally challenging the 25 percent import tariff imposed by the administration on steel in March. of the same year in accordance with section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act 1962. At the time, the administration also applied a 10 percent tariff on aluminum imports.

A lawyer representing AIIS on June 22 said the group was disappointed with the court's decision.

The importers hoped the Supreme Court would take up the case, as the US Court of Appeals, which had previously heard the appeal, had previously dismissed the importer's appeal, believing the court was bound by the precedent set in the 1970s Section 232 oil case (Federal Energy Management vs. Algonquin). CIT ruled that the steel importers case was controlled by part of the Supreme Court decision on Algonquin, which states that Section 232 does not violate the doctrine of non-delegation.

In its address, AIIS tried to distinguish the steel tariff from the Algonquin ruling, arguing that the law only concerns the president's power to set import duties and does not affect the constitutionality of the entire law. The court, however, stated that AIIS "did not provide a convincing explanation for distinguishing the tariffs discussed here from the licensing fees discussed there."

At the time, the appellate court noted that five Supreme Court justices had recently expressed interest in at least considering revising the delegation-doctrine standard that importers hoped would help bring the case to a higher court.