Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
A Gambling Paradox: Why An Origin-Neutral 'Zero-Quota' Is Not A Quota Under Gats Article Xvi, Donald H. Regan
A Gambling Paradox: Why An Origin-Neutral 'Zero-Quota' Is Not A Quota Under Gats Article Xvi, Donald H. Regan
Articles
In US-Gambling, the Appellate Body held that an origin-neutral prohibition on remote gambling (which is how they mostly viewed the United States law) was "in effect" a "zero-quota", and that such a "zero-quota" violated GATS Article XVI:2. That holding has been widely criticized, especially for what critics refer to as the Appellate Body's "effects test". This article argues that the Appellate Body's "in effect" analysis is not an "effects test" and is not the real problem. The real mistake is regarding a so-called "zero-quota" as a quota under Article XVI. That is inconsistent with the ordinary meaning of the word …
Further Thoughts On The Role Of Regulatory Purpose Under Article Iii Of The General Agreement On Tariffs And Trade: A Tribute To Bob Hudec, Donald H. Regan
Further Thoughts On The Role Of Regulatory Purpose Under Article Iii Of The General Agreement On Tariffs And Trade: A Tribute To Bob Hudec, Donald H. Regan
Articles
My topic in this article is the role of regulatory purpose under Article III of the GATT, and I regard Bob [Hudec] as the patron saint of efforts to establish the relevance of purpose. His famous "Requiem for an 'Aims and Effects' Test" may have been called a requiem, but it was reluctant and sceptical. Bob thought dispute settlement tribunals ought to consider the regulator's purpose, and he thought they would do so, whatever they said. As decisions on Article III accumulate, we are in the process of learning that he was right on both counts.
Refugee Rights Are Not Negotiable, James C. Hathaway, Anne K. Cusick
Refugee Rights Are Not Negotiable, James C. Hathaway, Anne K. Cusick
Articles
America's troubled relationship with international law, in particular human rights law, is well documented. In many cases, the United States simply will not agree to be bound by international human rights treaties. For example, the United States has yet to ratify even such fundamental agreements as the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women, and the Convention on the Rights of the Child. When the United States does agree to become a party to an international human rights treaty, it has often sought to condition its acceptance …