New York
Small businesses file lawsuits against Trump’s new tariffs
NEW YORK (AP) — Trump’s tariffs are headed to court — again.
Two lawsuits filed by small businesses are challenging Trump’s sweeping tariffs announced Thursday that impose double-digit levies on 60 trading partners.
The tariffs, implemented under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 for what the Trump administration says is countries’ failure to prevent imports produced by forced labor, cover 99% of U.S. imports. Critics say the goal is less to prevent forced-labor imports and more to replace the worldwide tariffs that Trump imposed last year that were struck down by the Supreme Court in February. They came just as temporary 10% worldwide tariffs — that had also been challenged in court — expired.
Educational toy company Learning Resources, which was part of the tariff lawsuit that won in the Supreme Court, filed a new suit along with several other small businesses in the Court of International Trade on Friday over the current round of tariffs.
The second lawsuit was filed by Burlap and Barrel, a New York-based spice company, and Collective Horology, a watch retailer based in Ventura, California. They are represented by Liberty Justice Center, a libertarian advocacy group.
Both lawsuits argue that the government didn’t adequately establish its case against each specific economy or spell how the tariffs will eliminate the specified practice they are being levied for, as required by Section 301.
“Forced labor is morally indefensible, but an important objective does not give the government permission to ignore the law,” said Sara Albrecht, chairman and CEO of the Liberty Justice Center. “The administration allowed one global tariff to expire and immediately replaced it with another under a different statute. Changing the statute doesn’t change the law.”
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Experts say it might be tougher to successfully challenge the current round of tariffs than previous rounds. Trump used Section 301 to impose big tariffs on China in his first term, and they survived court challenges.
Unlike the Section 122 levies that expired Friday, “these tariffs will be with us for the long haul,’’ said lawyer Patrick Childress, a partner at Holland & Knight and a former U.S. trade official.
Even if countries enact the precise policies the U.S. wants, he said, they will still need to prove that they’re enforcing them to Washington’s satisfaction before the tariffs are removed. “This suggests that no short-term path for country-wide relief from the new Section 301 tariffs will be available.’’
Washington
U.S. appeals court upholds injunction blocking Trump’s order to create a federal voter list
A federal appeals court has upheld a ruling that in nearly half of U.S. states halted President Donald Trump’s executive order to create a federal list of eligible voters and limit delivery of mail ballots only to people on that list.
The ruling Saturday by judges of the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the Trump administration’s effort to move forward with the mail-in voting restrictions in 23 U.S. states that sued ahead of November’s midterm elections.
Trump issued an executive order in March for the director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and the commissioner of the Social Security Administration to create a “state citizenship list” of eligible voters. It also ordered the U.S. Postal Service to deliver mail ballots only to people on that list.
While Trump touted the proposed changes as safeguards to keep non-U.S. citizens from voting, state election officials argued they were ripe for abuse and could cause chaos.
Democratic officials in 23 states and the District of Columbia challenged Trump’s order in a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Boston. They argued that Trump’s order was unconstitutional because the states and Congress, not the president, have the authority to set election rules.
U.S. District Court Judge Indira Talwani, who was nominated by Democratic President Barack Obama, agreed and halted Trump’s order from being implemented for the Nov. 3 elections — but only in the states that have sued.
The Justice Department said in an emailed statement Sunday that it is “reviewing all options” regarding its next legal steps and is confident that Trump’s executive order will ultimately be upheld.
Washington
Biden drops lawsuit seeking to block release of recordings of his interviews with a ghostwriter
WASHINGTON (AP) — Joe Biden on Friday dropped a lawsuit in which he sought block the release of audio recordings and transcripts of his interviews with a memoir ghostwriter before the Delaware Democrat was elected president, paving the way for the material to be released to a Republican-led congressional committee.
Biden’s attorneys filed the notice of voluntary dismissal less than a week after a divided panel of appeals court judges rejected his bid to block the material’s release. Biden could have petitioned the Supreme Court to intervene or asked for a rehearing by the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
In a 2-1 ruling on Monday, a three-judge panel from the circuit court found a “substantial” public interest in disclosing the material that Biden wants to keep under wraps. The panel had suspended its decision until Aug. 3 to allow more time for Biden to consider his appellate options.
Circuit Judge Florence Pan wrote a dissenting opinion in which she said Biden has shown a “substantial privacy interest” in keeping the material hidden. The appeal also was heard by D.C. Circuit Chief Judge Sri Srinivasan and Judge Gregory Katsas.
Pan was nominated to the court by Biden, a Democrat. Srinivasan was nominated by President Barack Obama, also a Democrat. Katsas was nominated by President Donald Trump, a Republican.
Mark Zwonitzer, who worked with Biden on two memoirs, 2007’s “Promises to Keep” and 2017’s “Promise Me, Dad,” interviewed him at his home in 2016 and 2017. Biden’s lawyers say the conversations were candid, personal and intended to remain private.
The recordings were obtained by special counsel Robert Hur, who investigated Biden’s handling of classified documents from his time as a senator from Delaware and as Obama’s vice president. Republicans in Congress demanded the material after Hur declined to file charges against the then-president.
Biden sued and sought an injunction to prevent the Justice Department under Trump from releasing the recordings to Congress and the conservative Heritage Foundation. The department previously argued that the recordings were exempt from disclosure under public records law.
Biden appealed after U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich, a Trump nominee, ruled in June that the public interest in the material outweighed whatever privacy rights Biden had.
Wisconsin
Voters sue to allow for vote to count if absentee ballot is late
MADISON, Wis. (AP) — Voters in swing state Wisconsin whose absentee ballots don’t arrive by Election Day should be allowed to cast provisional ballots at the polls to ensure their votes are counted, a lawsuit filed Friday argues.
The lawsuit comes amid growing concerns about how quickly the United States Postal Service will be able to deliver ballots ahead of the November midterms. Control of Congress is at stake, and Wisconsin voters will be electing a new governor as well as determining control of the Legislature.
The bipartisan Wisconsin Elections Commission warned the U.S. postmaster general in May that any delay could deprive citizens of their fundamental right to vote. In January, a group of mostly Democratic U.S. senators also wrote the postal service, raising concerns that a change in how it postmarks mail could invalidate many mail-in ballots.
The lawsuit comes after the mail-in ballots of nearly 150,000 California voters were rejected, the vast majority of them because of late postmarks, despite the state’s efforts to count every valid vote in the June primary.
In Wisconsin, at least hundreds of ballots were not counted in the April election because they arrived late, based on an elections commission survey of election clerks. More than 300 ballots in Milwaukee and more than 100 in Fond du Lac were rejected for arriving too late.
The lawsuit was filed in Dane County circuit court by the liberal Madison-based Law Forward firm and Washington, D.C.-based Fair Elections Center on behalf of a voter and the League of Women Voters of Wisconsin.
A spokesperson for the elections commission had no immediate comment.
“Every voter in Wisconsin that puts an accurately requested absentee ballot in the mail on time expects their vote will be counted,” said Debra Cronmiller, executive director of League of Women Voters of Wisconsin, in a statement. “Delays in mail delivery prevent that. It is time to have a remedy for these eligible voters.”
Currently in Wisconsin, voters are prohibited from casting a provisional ballot in person on Election Day. The lawsuit is asking a judge to rule that if a voter’s absentee ballot has not arrived, they can then cast a provisional ballot. Absentee voters in the state can track the status of their ballots, so they would know on Election Day whether it has been received.
Provisional ballots are set aside by election officials and only counted if a voter’s absentee ballot is not delivered on time. If the absentee ballot does arrive on time, the provisional ballot would not be counted.
In Wisconsin, ballots must arrive at the clerk’s office by the end of voting on Election Day in order to be counted.
Nevada
Formula 1 parent company reaches $3M settlement in lawsuit over Las Vegas Grand Prix 2023 tickets
LAS VEGAS (AP) — Formula 1 parent company Liberty Media, which also promotes the Las Vegas Grand Prix, has agreed to a settlement of about $3 million to end a class-action lawsuit brought by spectators regarding the inaugural 2023 race.
The opening-night practice session on Nov. 16, 2023, was halted after nine minutes when Carlos Sainz Jr. drove over a water valve cover that severely damaged his Ferrari. Practice didn’t resume until the early morning hours of Nov. 17, ending at about 4 a.m. local time.
Fans were removed from the viewing areas before the 90-minute session took place.
Those who had tickets for only that practice session or bought three-night tickets are eligible for compensation under the settlement. Claims must be filed by Aug. 27.
Liberty Media and the Las Vegas Grand Prix did not admit fault under the settlement. A final approval hearing is scheduled for Nov. 4 at U.S. District Court of Nevada.
The $500 million race in 2023 was supposed to be F1’s coming-out party on the Las Vegas Strip, and the practice-night crash as well as the disruptions to Las Vegas-area residents during months of preparation didn’t make for a promising start.
But the race itself was among the best on the circuit that season, and Max Verstappen sang “Viva Las Vegas” as he crossed the finish line for his 18th victory that year.
F1 announced a 10-year extension last month that will keep the circuit in Las Vegas through at least 2037.
Small businesses file lawsuits against Trump’s new tariffs
NEW YORK (AP) — Trump’s tariffs are headed to court — again.
Two lawsuits filed by small businesses are challenging Trump’s sweeping tariffs announced Thursday that impose double-digit levies on 60 trading partners.
The tariffs, implemented under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 for what the Trump administration says is countries’ failure to prevent imports produced by forced labor, cover 99% of U.S. imports. Critics say the goal is less to prevent forced-labor imports and more to replace the worldwide tariffs that Trump imposed last year that were struck down by the Supreme Court in February. They came just as temporary 10% worldwide tariffs — that had also been challenged in court — expired.
Educational toy company Learning Resources, which was part of the tariff lawsuit that won in the Supreme Court, filed a new suit along with several other small businesses in the Court of International Trade on Friday over the current round of tariffs.
The second lawsuit was filed by Burlap and Barrel, a New York-based spice company, and Collective Horology, a watch retailer based in Ventura, California. They are represented by Liberty Justice Center, a libertarian advocacy group.
Both lawsuits argue that the government didn’t adequately establish its case against each specific economy or spell how the tariffs will eliminate the specified practice they are being levied for, as required by Section 301.
“Forced labor is morally indefensible, but an important objective does not give the government permission to ignore the law,” said Sara Albrecht, chairman and CEO of the Liberty Justice Center. “The administration allowed one global tariff to expire and immediately replaced it with another under a different statute. Changing the statute doesn’t change the law.”
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Experts say it might be tougher to successfully challenge the current round of tariffs than previous rounds. Trump used Section 301 to impose big tariffs on China in his first term, and they survived court challenges.
Unlike the Section 122 levies that expired Friday, “these tariffs will be with us for the long haul,’’ said lawyer Patrick Childress, a partner at Holland & Knight and a former U.S. trade official.
Even if countries enact the precise policies the U.S. wants, he said, they will still need to prove that they’re enforcing them to Washington’s satisfaction before the tariffs are removed. “This suggests that no short-term path for country-wide relief from the new Section 301 tariffs will be available.’’
Washington
U.S. appeals court upholds injunction blocking Trump’s order to create a federal voter list
A federal appeals court has upheld a ruling that in nearly half of U.S. states halted President Donald Trump’s executive order to create a federal list of eligible voters and limit delivery of mail ballots only to people on that list.
The ruling Saturday by judges of the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the Trump administration’s effort to move forward with the mail-in voting restrictions in 23 U.S. states that sued ahead of November’s midterm elections.
Trump issued an executive order in March for the director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and the commissioner of the Social Security Administration to create a “state citizenship list” of eligible voters. It also ordered the U.S. Postal Service to deliver mail ballots only to people on that list.
While Trump touted the proposed changes as safeguards to keep non-U.S. citizens from voting, state election officials argued they were ripe for abuse and could cause chaos.
Democratic officials in 23 states and the District of Columbia challenged Trump’s order in a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Boston. They argued that Trump’s order was unconstitutional because the states and Congress, not the president, have the authority to set election rules.
U.S. District Court Judge Indira Talwani, who was nominated by Democratic President Barack Obama, agreed and halted Trump’s order from being implemented for the Nov. 3 elections — but only in the states that have sued.
The Justice Department said in an emailed statement Sunday that it is “reviewing all options” regarding its next legal steps and is confident that Trump’s executive order will ultimately be upheld.
Washington
Biden drops lawsuit seeking to block release of recordings of his interviews with a ghostwriter
WASHINGTON (AP) — Joe Biden on Friday dropped a lawsuit in which he sought block the release of audio recordings and transcripts of his interviews with a memoir ghostwriter before the Delaware Democrat was elected president, paving the way for the material to be released to a Republican-led congressional committee.
Biden’s attorneys filed the notice of voluntary dismissal less than a week after a divided panel of appeals court judges rejected his bid to block the material’s release. Biden could have petitioned the Supreme Court to intervene or asked for a rehearing by the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
In a 2-1 ruling on Monday, a three-judge panel from the circuit court found a “substantial” public interest in disclosing the material that Biden wants to keep under wraps. The panel had suspended its decision until Aug. 3 to allow more time for Biden to consider his appellate options.
Circuit Judge Florence Pan wrote a dissenting opinion in which she said Biden has shown a “substantial privacy interest” in keeping the material hidden. The appeal also was heard by D.C. Circuit Chief Judge Sri Srinivasan and Judge Gregory Katsas.
Pan was nominated to the court by Biden, a Democrat. Srinivasan was nominated by President Barack Obama, also a Democrat. Katsas was nominated by President Donald Trump, a Republican.
Mark Zwonitzer, who worked with Biden on two memoirs, 2007’s “Promises to Keep” and 2017’s “Promise Me, Dad,” interviewed him at his home in 2016 and 2017. Biden’s lawyers say the conversations were candid, personal and intended to remain private.
The recordings were obtained by special counsel Robert Hur, who investigated Biden’s handling of classified documents from his time as a senator from Delaware and as Obama’s vice president. Republicans in Congress demanded the material after Hur declined to file charges against the then-president.
Biden sued and sought an injunction to prevent the Justice Department under Trump from releasing the recordings to Congress and the conservative Heritage Foundation. The department previously argued that the recordings were exempt from disclosure under public records law.
Biden appealed after U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich, a Trump nominee, ruled in June that the public interest in the material outweighed whatever privacy rights Biden had.
Wisconsin
Voters sue to allow for vote to count if absentee ballot is late
MADISON, Wis. (AP) — Voters in swing state Wisconsin whose absentee ballots don’t arrive by Election Day should be allowed to cast provisional ballots at the polls to ensure their votes are counted, a lawsuit filed Friday argues.
The lawsuit comes amid growing concerns about how quickly the United States Postal Service will be able to deliver ballots ahead of the November midterms. Control of Congress is at stake, and Wisconsin voters will be electing a new governor as well as determining control of the Legislature.
The bipartisan Wisconsin Elections Commission warned the U.S. postmaster general in May that any delay could deprive citizens of their fundamental right to vote. In January, a group of mostly Democratic U.S. senators also wrote the postal service, raising concerns that a change in how it postmarks mail could invalidate many mail-in ballots.
The lawsuit comes after the mail-in ballots of nearly 150,000 California voters were rejected, the vast majority of them because of late postmarks, despite the state’s efforts to count every valid vote in the June primary.
In Wisconsin, at least hundreds of ballots were not counted in the April election because they arrived late, based on an elections commission survey of election clerks. More than 300 ballots in Milwaukee and more than 100 in Fond du Lac were rejected for arriving too late.
The lawsuit was filed in Dane County circuit court by the liberal Madison-based Law Forward firm and Washington, D.C.-based Fair Elections Center on behalf of a voter and the League of Women Voters of Wisconsin.
A spokesperson for the elections commission had no immediate comment.
“Every voter in Wisconsin that puts an accurately requested absentee ballot in the mail on time expects their vote will be counted,” said Debra Cronmiller, executive director of League of Women Voters of Wisconsin, in a statement. “Delays in mail delivery prevent that. It is time to have a remedy for these eligible voters.”
Currently in Wisconsin, voters are prohibited from casting a provisional ballot in person on Election Day. The lawsuit is asking a judge to rule that if a voter’s absentee ballot has not arrived, they can then cast a provisional ballot. Absentee voters in the state can track the status of their ballots, so they would know on Election Day whether it has been received.
Provisional ballots are set aside by election officials and only counted if a voter’s absentee ballot is not delivered on time. If the absentee ballot does arrive on time, the provisional ballot would not be counted.
In Wisconsin, ballots must arrive at the clerk’s office by the end of voting on Election Day in order to be counted.
Nevada
Formula 1 parent company reaches $3M settlement in lawsuit over Las Vegas Grand Prix 2023 tickets
LAS VEGAS (AP) — Formula 1 parent company Liberty Media, which also promotes the Las Vegas Grand Prix, has agreed to a settlement of about $3 million to end a class-action lawsuit brought by spectators regarding the inaugural 2023 race.
The opening-night practice session on Nov. 16, 2023, was halted after nine minutes when Carlos Sainz Jr. drove over a water valve cover that severely damaged his Ferrari. Practice didn’t resume until the early morning hours of Nov. 17, ending at about 4 a.m. local time.
Fans were removed from the viewing areas before the 90-minute session took place.
Those who had tickets for only that practice session or bought three-night tickets are eligible for compensation under the settlement. Claims must be filed by Aug. 27.
Liberty Media and the Las Vegas Grand Prix did not admit fault under the settlement. A final approval hearing is scheduled for Nov. 4 at U.S. District Court of Nevada.
The $500 million race in 2023 was supposed to be F1’s coming-out party on the Las Vegas Strip, and the practice-night crash as well as the disruptions to Las Vegas-area residents during months of preparation didn’t make for a promising start.
But the race itself was among the best on the circuit that season, and Max Verstappen sang “Viva Las Vegas” as he crossed the finish line for his 18th victory that year.
F1 announced a 10-year extension last month that will keep the circuit in Las Vegas through at least 2037.
