In this article, I undertake a similar review of three recent Federal Circuit opinions involving an interpretation of the antidumping duty statute by the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC). In two instances,7 the CAFC upheld the ITC's statutory interpretation of the antidumping duty law; in the third decision, the court rejected the ITC's view. In this article, I argue that in the two cases where the Federal Circuit sustained the ITC's interpretation of the antidumping duty law, the court conducted an independent review, notwithstanding its purported deference to the Commission's expertise. In the third case, Bingham & Taylor Div., Virginia Industries, Inc. v. United States, the CAFC rejected the ITC's interpretation of the antidumping duty law, concluding that the deference rule was not applicable. The result of these three cases is that the Federal Circuit has effectively abandoned the deference rule in its review of ITC interpretations of the antidumping duty law.
Kennedy, Kevin C.
"Abandoning the Deference Rule in ITC Interpretations of the Antidumping Duty Law,"
Syracuse Journal of International Law and Commerce:
1, Article 4.
Available at: http://surface.syr.edu/jilc/vol14/iss1/4