Search

CIT Suspends IEEPA Duty Refund Order for CBP ACE Functionality

The U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) has suspended its order requiring immediate refunds of IEEPA duties. This suspension allows U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) time to develop new Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) functionality to process these refunds, estimated to be implemented in 45 days. Importers are advised to complete electronic refund setup and consider filing protests.

Section 122 Tariffs Challenged in U.S. Court of International Trade

24 states have filed a lawsuit in the U.S. Court of International Trade challenging the Section 122 tariffs imposed by President Trump on February 20, 2026. The states argue the conditions for invoking Section 122 were not met and the tariffs exceed the statute's scope. This case is expected to be expedited.

Court Orders Removal of IEEPA Tariffs on U.S. Imports

The U.S. Court of International Trade has ordered the government to remove International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) tariffs on U.S. imports, following a Supreme Court decision. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) indicated it could begin issuing refunds within 45 days, though importers are advised to monitor liquidation entries and file protests.

Court of International Trade Pauses IEEPA Refunds

The U.S. Court of International Trade has paused the immediate refund of duties imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) while leaving the underlying obligation to refund intact. This decision acknowledges practical limitations faced by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) in processing an estimated $166 billion in refunds for over 330,000 importers.

Arizona Court Opinion on Parental Rights

The Arizona Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court's decision to terminate a mother's parental rights. The decision was based on the mother's history of substance abuse and neglect, as well as the child's exposure to substances at birth. This is a non-precedential decision.

M.A. v. T.D. - Abuse Prevention Order Extension

The Massachusetts Appeals Court affirmed the extension of an abuse prevention order against T.D. The court found that the plaintiff established sufficient grounds for the extension, despite the defendant's arguments regarding imminent danger. The decision is a non-precedential summary order.

B.B. v. Capistrano Unified School District - First Amendment Student Speech

The Ninth Circuit vacated a district court's grant of summary judgment in B.B. v. Capistrano Unified School District, holding that elementary students' speech is protected by the First Amendment under the Tinker standard. The court remanded the case, finding genuine disputes of material fact regarding whether the school principal's actions were reasonably necessary to prevent disruption or protect other students.

Rojas-Espinoza v. Bondi - Motion to Stay Removal Denied

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denied a motion to stay removal for petitioners Rojas-Espinoza and others in their case against Pamela Bondi. The court lifted a temporary stay of removal, effective immediately. A concurring opinion addressed procedural concerns regarding the court's handling of stay practices.

Deras v. Johnson & Johnson - FLSA Unpaid Wages Case

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the district court's dismissal of Francisco Deras's FLSA unpaid wages case against Johnson & Johnson. The appellate court remanded the case for further proceedings, finding the district court's interpretation of local rules and precedent regarding attorney procedural errors to be overly broad.

S.B.01 v. Uber Technologies, Inc. et al - Personal Injury Product Liability

A new civil case, S.B.01 v. Uber Technologies, Inc. et al, has been filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The case, bearing number 3:26-cv-02064, is based on diversity jurisdiction and involves a claim of personal injury product liability. The initial complaint and related documents were filed on March 10, 2026.