"The court found legal violations by the Federal Government in setting Tariffs, but limited any practical relief - at least for the time being. The 7-4 Federal Circuit majority held that much of the President's sweeping tariff program is unconstitutional, but also vacated the CIT's injunction against the tariffs. On remand, the CIT is charged with applying and considering the Supreme Court's new remedial framework from Trump v. CASA, Inc., 145 S. Ct. 1847 (2025)."
"This two-step dance - merits victory, remedial defeat - is something familiar to patent practitioners who have watched the Federal Circuit navigate similar tensions between legal rights and practical relief. Even after proving infringement and defending against validity challenges, the eBay framework substantially limits patentee access to injunctive relief to stop ongoing infringement, and the rising tide against testimony for proving money damages."
The Federal Circuit en banc concluded that much of the President's tariff program is unconstitutional and identified legal violations in how the Federal Government set tariffs. The court nonetheless vacated the Court of International Trade's injunction, thereby limiting immediate practical relief. The case was remanded for the CIT to consider and apply the Supreme Court's remedial framework from Trump v. CASA. The outcome demonstrates remedial restraint where substantive legal victories do not automatically produce broad equitable remedies. Similar dynamics appear in patent law through eBay limits on injunctions and constraints on damages evidence.
Read at Patently-O
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]