descrybe logo
You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Corus Group Plc, Corus Uk Ltd, Corus Staal Bv, Corus Packaging Plus Norway As, Corus Steel USA Inc., and Corus America Inc. v. International Trade Commission, and George W. Bush, President of the United States, and Robert C. Bonner, Commissioner, United States Customs Service, and Weirton Steel Corporation, and Bethlehem Steel Corporation, National Steel Corporation, and United States Steel Corporation

Citations: 352 F.3d 1351; 25 I.T.R.D. (BNA) 1865; 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 24901Docket: 03-1040

Court: Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit; December 10, 2003; Federal Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The case involves an appeal by Corus Group PLC and its affiliates against a summary judgment from the United States Court of International Trade, which upheld the imposition of an ad valorem duty on imported tin mill products by President George W. Bush. The appellants challenged the President's authority under the Trade Act of 1974, arguing that the International Trade Commission (ITC) did not provide a decisive vote, rendering the duty imposition invalid. The Court of International Trade found jurisdiction and standing, dismissing the President as a party based on 28 U.S.C. 1581(i), which does not allow actions directly against him. The ITC's split decision was deemed valid, allowing the President to act under the statute. The appellate court affirmed the lower court's decision, ruling that the President's actions were within his discretionary powers under the Trade Act, given the ITC's tie vote on the injury determination. The case highlights the scope of presidential authority in trade matters and the limited judicial review available for such executive actions. The appeal against the President was dismissed, but the summary judgment for the government was upheld, affirming the duties imposed on tin mill products.

Legal Issues Addressed

Discretion in Presidential Decisions

Application: The President has discretion to impose duties following a split decision by the ITC, and such actions are subject to limited judicial review.

Reasoning: The President imposed duties on tin mill products without differentiating them from carbon and alloy flat products.

Judicial Review of ITC Decisions

Application: The ITC's decision on injury determination is reviewable, and a tie in the Commission's vote is valid for the President's actions under the statute.

Reasoning: The Commission reported a split decision on the injury caused by tin mill imports, with three commissioners finding no substantial injury while three others affirmed injury.

Jurisdiction and Standing under 28 U.S.C. 1581(i)

Application: The Court of International Trade has statutory jurisdiction over civil actions against the United States concerning tariffs and duties, except for actions against the President.

Reasoning: The court found the following: 1) the Court of International Trade had jurisdiction and the appellants had standing; 2) the President should be dismissed as a party since 28 U.S.C. 1581(i) does not allow actions against him.

Presidential Authority under the Trade Act of 1974

Application: The President's imposition of duties on tin mill products is valid as long as the ITC's findings of serious injury are upheld, reinforcing the President's broad powers under the Act.

Reasoning: The Trade Act of 1974 confers broad powers to the President related to trade agreements and the adjustment of import duties.

Standard of Review for Presidential Actions

Application: Judicial intervention requires evidence of a clear misconstruction of the statute, significant procedural violations, or actions outside delegated authority.

Reasoning: The statutory standard for judicial review in this context deviates from the traditional Administrative Procedure Act (APA) standard.