I haven't yet gotten to the substantive discussion of the NAFTA Chapter 19 panel finding that zeroing violates U.S. law, but in the meantime let me ask this question: Is there any chance this finding will lead to a constitutional challenge to NAFTA Chapter 19? That's what happened in the softwood lumber case (the complaint was dropped after the case was settled). Here's a brief snippet of the argument that was made there:
The constitutional argument is that binational panels and extraordinary challenge committees replace judicial review of decisions by the Department of Commerce and the U.S. Court of International Trade that would ordinarily be subject to review under Article III. The complaint charges Congress with "impermissibly outsourc[ing]" to binational panels adjudicatory power that were previously exercised by Article III courts. It asserts numerous constitutional infirmities including violations of Articles I, II, III, and V, the Due Process Clause, the Appointments clause, and the Non-Delegation Doctrine.
More here from the Coalition for Fair Lumber Imports.
I haven't heard any suggestion of such a complaint here, but it's clear that the supporters of zeroing feel pretty strongly about their position.
