>* In 2021, the State Department upheld their decision to remove the plans from the "export-controlled weapons" list. >the appellate panel found 2-1 that a 198

>* In 2021, the State Department upheld their decision to remove the plans from the "export-controlled weapons" list. >the appellate panel found 2-1 that a 1989 federal law prohibits courts from overruling the State Department’s decision to add or remove a weapon from the Munitions List nit: As I understand it, they didn't uphold the decision, they decided the courts had no say in the matter, and could not overrule even if they wanted to. Which makes the dissenting judge's opinion a little concerning, because he seems to have been trying a different decision making process -- the courts should have a say, because he wanted to have a say in the matter. but I'm basing this on the one quote from the article.