Academic journal article Georgetown Journal of International Law
This is the seventh anniversary of the Georgetown Journal of International Law's (GJIL) publication of a volume in which practitioners offer commentary on the cases decided in the preceding year by the Court of International Trade (CIT) and appeals heard by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC). I applaud this important milestone. Seven years of publication means that the annual trade review has been established as a continuing project of a distinguished law journal, thus ensuring that consistently high editorial standards will be applied to the examination of the numerous trade and customs cases decided each year. In addition, because the Journal is widely read, the annual trade review will continue to bring this somewhat recondite, but nonetheless nationally important, area of law to a broader audience than those who subscribe to specialized publications alone.
Equally important is that GJIL is now firmly settled as the place where practitioners (i.e., lawyers) may offer their commentary on the year's opinions. Unlike the many articles in other journals, which come from members of the academe who are not practicing members of the bar, these articles are written by the very attorneys who argue before our Court and the CAFC, making them of particular interest to the judiciary. This unique aspect of GJIL's annual trade review should prove interesting and useful to a broader range of readers as well. These lawyers, in their role as litigators, alloy the raw material of the decisions they discuss here into the arguments driving the cases to come. Frequently, articles in the annual trade review spot trends and identify issues not yet fully recognized by the courts, but that will be central to the actual cases that will come before them in the future.
As in the past, this trade review covers all of the CIT's reported cases and many of the CAFC's opinions issued during the year. Thus, the reader will encounter an extensive review of the notable antidumping and countervailing duty opinions issued in 2011--cases that make up the bulk of the CIT's docket--and the less litigated, but no less complex, appeals from the International Trade Commission. To be sure, the reader will encounter issues that have regularly arisen since the enactment of the Customs Court Act of 1980, which established the CIT's jurisdiction over trade cases. …