On May 29, a day after the U.S. Court of International Trade (“CIT”) issued summary judgment in V.O.S. v. Trump blocking the IEEPA tariffs, the District Court for the District of Columbia (“DDC”) exercised jurisdiction in Learning Resources, Inc., et. al., v. Donald J. Trump, et. al. (25-cv-1248), denying the government’s motion to transfer the case to the CIT and granting a preliminary injunction to enjoin the government from enforcing the IEEPA tariffs against the Learning Resources plaintiffs.

As with V.O.S., Learning Resources was filed following President Trump’s invocation of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (“IEEPA”) which imposed tariffs on a slew of countries. Plaintiffs Learning Resources, Inc. and hand2mind, Inc. contended that:

  • IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs,
  • If IEEPA does authorize the President to impose tariffs, the challenged tariffs are not legal, and
  • if IEEPA were interpreted to allow for the President to impose the challenged tariffs, the statute itself would be unconstitutional on grounds it violates the nondelegation doctrine.

Defendants Donald J. Trump and multiple government agencies and officials moved to transfer the case to the CIT, arguing that the CIT has exclusive jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1581(i) and 1337(c). Meanwhile, Plaintiffs moved for a preliminary injunction. After hearing argument this past Tuesday, May 27, the Court ruled for Plaintiffs on both motions, denying the government’s motion to transfer and granting Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction.

The DDC’s exercise of jurisdiction is a departure from several other district courts that granted the government’s motion to transfer substantively identical cases to the CIT on the basis that the CIT has exclusive jurisdiction over actions arising from statutes that provide for the imposition of tariffs. See Simplified v. Trump et al. Case No. 3:25-cv-00464 (N.D.Fla.); Webber et al. v. U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security et al.; and Case No. 4:25-cv-00026 (D. Mont.). A motion to transfer remains pending in California v. Trump, Case No. 3:25-cv-03372 (N.D. Cal.). Unlike those other courts, and unlike the CIT itself in V.O.S., the DDC determined that IEEPA is not properly construed as providing for the imposition of tariffs.

The DDC stayed its order for 14 days to give the government an opportunity to appeal to the D.C. Circuit, and the government did so the same day. Meanwhile, in V.O.S. case, which the government also immediately appealed to the Federal Circuit, the Federal Circuit entered an administrative stay pending further action on the government’s motion for an emergency stay pending appeal. The DDC decision assures that in addition to the merits question of whether IEEPA authorizes tariffs, the appellate courts (possibly including the Supreme Court) will also have to contend with the jurisdictional question.

Tags: CIT, Court of International Trade, Customs, IEEPA, IEEPA Tariffs, tariffs
Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Daniel W. Wolff Daniel W. Wolff

Dan Wolff represents clients facing enterprise-level risks arising out of government enforcement actions and complex commercial disputes. He is a problem solver who understands how to use litigation, whether as plaintiff or defendant, to achieve exceptional business solutions and outcomes. Dan leads the…

Dan Wolff represents clients facing enterprise-level risks arising out of government enforcement actions and complex commercial disputes. He is a problem solver who understands how to use litigation, whether as plaintiff or defendant, to achieve exceptional business solutions and outcomes. Dan leads the firm’s administrative law litigation practice, counseling clients and litigating on their behalf in federal and state courts around the country in matters arising under the Administrative Procedure Act, other federal statutes, and the U.S. Constitution. He also litigates commercial disputes and matters arising in tort. He has deep experience arguing dispositive motions and appeals, in addition to trying jury cases. Notably, The National Law Journal named Dan a Political Activism and First Amendment Rights Trailblazer.

Beyond the courtroom, clients also seek Danʼs counsel in government investigations of workplace accidents, fatalities, supervisor liability, and requests for company records.

Dan serves on the firm’s Public Service Committee and maintains an active pro bono practice. In recent years, he has focused on civil rights impact litigation, helping to secure victories or favorable settlements under the First Amendment, § 1983, and the Voting Rights Act.

Immediately following law school, Dan clerked for two years in the Southern District of Ohio for the Honorable Walter H. Rice. He is licensed to practice in the District of Columbia and Ohio and is also a member of the bars of multiple federal courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court.

Read more about Daniel W. WolffDaniel's Linkedin Profile
Show more Show less
Photo of Sibilla Grenon Sibilla Grenon

Sibilla Grenon is an associate in Crowell & Moring’s International Trade Group.

Before joining Crowell, Sibilla clerked for the Honorable Timothy M. Reif of the Court of International Trade, where she assisted Judge Reif in cases related to antidumping and countervailing duties, customs,

…

Sibilla Grenon is an associate in Crowell & Moring’s International Trade Group.

Before joining Crowell, Sibilla clerked for the Honorable Timothy M. Reif of the Court of International Trade, where she assisted Judge Reif in cases related to antidumping and countervailing duties, customs, and matters arising from the Court’s residual jurisdiction. Sibilla also assisted Judge Reif in the adjudication of cases before the Southern District of New York, notably in areas of trade secret and copyright law. Prior to her clerkship, Sibilla was an associate in the litigation group of a law firm where she represented clients on compliance issues concerning privacy and data security for large corporations in accordance with state, federal, and international privacy regulations (GDPR, CCPA, CPRA, TCPA, BIPA, and GLBA) and employment matters.

Sibilla is a Rising Leader with the Aspen Strategy Group, a program that cultivates the next generation of rising leaders in national security and foreign policy.

As a law student, Sibilla served as the articles editor for the Georgetown Journal of International Law, a fellow at the Institute of International Economic Law, and was a member of Georgetown’s francophone moot court team of the Concours d’Arbitrage International de Paris.

Read more about Sibilla Grenon
Show more Show less
Photo of Emily Devereaux Emily Devereaux

Emily Devereaux is a senior international trade analyst I in Crowell & Moring’s Washington, D.C. office. She provides practice support to the International Trade Group on import regulatory matters pending before the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) and U.S. Customs and

…

Emily Devereaux is a senior international trade analyst I in Crowell & Moring’s Washington, D.C. office. She provides practice support to the International Trade Group on import regulatory matters pending before the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). She works closely with attorneys developing courses of action for clients impacted by investigations under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 and Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. She also supports unfair trade investigations, including antidumping (AD) and countervailing duty (CVD) investigations, sunset reviews, and changed circumstance reviews before the Department of Commerce and the International Trade Commission (ITC).

Read more about Emily Devereaux
Show more Show less
Related Posts
Update on Parallel Federal Court Cases Enjoining IEEPA
June 6, 2025
Cassidy, Whitehouse Propose Customs Modernization Act to Enhance CBP Authority, Strengthen Enforcement
December 20, 2023
The Catch 22 of Defending Parallel Civil and Criminal Proceedings
October 17, 2023