Center for Policy Analysis on Trade & Health v. Office of United States Trade Representative

Good Law
540 F.3d 940·2008 WL 3876586·30 I.T.R.D. (BNA) 2339·2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 18011
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 22, 200806-16682California2,830 words

Opinion

Opinion

Smith, J.

The “fairly balanced” membership requirement, imposed by the Federal Advisory Committee Act (“FACA”) and applied to the Trade Act of 1974 (“Trade Act”), is not reviewable because those statutes provide us with no meaningful standards to apply. The district court therefore properly dismissed the complaint by the Center for Policy Analysis on Trade and Health, California Public Health Association— North, Chinese Progressive Association, and Physicians for Social Responsibility (collectively, “CPATH”). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

I.

A.

The Trade Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2155 , et seq., directs the United States Trade Representative and the United States Department of Commerce (collectively, “USTR”) to obtain policy advice and information regarding trade issues from a series of advisory committees known as Industry Trade Advisory Committees or “ITACs.” See 19 U.S.C. § 2155 (c). ITACs provide United States trade negotiators with policy advice on (1) “negotiating objectives and bargaining positions before entering into a trade agreement,” (2) “the operation of any trade agreement once entered into,” and (3) “other matters arising in connection with the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.