International economic law and policy blog

International Economic Law and Policy Blog

Sign in Subscribe

Latest — 16 Mar 2026

The Section 301 Surge Continues: Investigating the Adoption/Enforcement/Administration of Forced Labor Import Bans

This Section 301 investigation intends to pressure all sixty named trade partners (even, inexplicably, including Canada and Mexico) to adopt similar enforcement procedures. This announcement is highly problematic for the four reasons I address below.

The Section 301 Surge Is Upon Us: Investigating Excess Capacity and Production

The first of a large batch of expected Section 301 investigations has arrived, as USTR announced yesterday that it was initiating investigations on acts, policies, and practices of various countries/economies "relating to structural excess capacity and production in manufacturing sectors."

The Divide Between the U.S. and Others on Trade Dispute Settlement

In a recent piece on USMCA dispute settlement, former U.S. Ambassador to the WTO Maria Pagan talks about a "divide between the United States and many others over state-to-state dispute settlement mechanisms," as follows: On the one hand, you have those who view state-to-state mechanism more like

Debunking the "Hyperglobalization" Trade Policy Myth

Policy is often shaped by narratives, and recently there has been a bipartisan effort to create a narrative that, starting in the early 1990s, globalization and free trade went too far.

Jamieson Greer on the Non-Violation Remedy

In a speech at UVA law school earlier this week, U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer offered the following description of the GATT non-violation remedy: The non-violation remedy in the GATT (Article 23:1(b)) makes this point clear. It allows member countries to seek a remedy even when the

Guest Post: Are President Trump’s New Section 122 Tariffs Legal?

This is a guest post from Bryan Riley and Joe Bishop-Henchman. Bryan is Director of the Free Trade Initiative at the National Taxpayers Union; Joe is Executive Vice President at the National Taxpayers Union Foundation President Trump has issued new 10% tariffs, shortly after raised to 15%, based on Section

What happens to all the frameworks, deals, and agreements negotiated by USTR since April 2, 2025?

With the Supreme Court ruling (6-3) that the President lacks inherent peacetime authority to impose tariffs under IEEPA, the question is what happens to the trade/security deals (informal and formal agreements) negotiated in the shadow of the IEEPA tariffs? This post explains how the US has sought to separate

Job Posting: Teaching Fellow, and Lecturer in Law, International Economic Law, Business and Policy (IELBP), Stanford Law

This is from Alan Sykes at Stanford Law School: STANFORD LAW SCHOOL seeks to hire a teaching fellow for the LLM Program in International Economic Law, Business & Policy. The appointment is for a two-year position with the possibility of a third year by mutual agreement, beginning in August 2026.

Section 122 as a (Partial) Replacement for the IEEPA Tariffs

Apparently, this is the era of dusting off old international economic policy statutes and figuring out what they mean and how they work. After the Supreme Court's ruling today in Learning Resources, holding that "IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs," we are now

Comparing the Forced Labor Provisions in the New U.S. Trade Deals

Continuing my multi-part blog posting series on comparing provisions in the Trump administration trade agreements, let's look now at the provisions that try to induce U.S. trading partners to take action against imports made with forced labor.