Yesterday, led by Charles Schumer of New York, a group of Senate Democrats unveiled a protectionist trade platform that, as the New York Times put it, "seek[s] to outdo Trump on trade." The platform includes taking unilateral action against our trading partners "independent from...WTO constraints&

Law student Ritwik Bhattacharya sends along an interesting short paper on China's non-market economy status, entitled "Three Viewpoints on China's Non-Market Economy Status."  Here's the abstract: On December 15, 2016, China requested consultations with the United States and the European

Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross has a new op-ed in the WSJ.  One thing he does in the op-ed is include a chart of average applied tariffs for the U.S., EU and China, after which he says this: As the nearby chart shows, China’s tariffs are

In a recent ESIL Reflection, Malcolm Langford, Daniel Behn and Runar Hilleren Lie examine “The Ethics and Empirics of Double Hatting” in investor-state arbitration. (For the full article, see the Journal of International Economic Law). They found that a total of 47% of the cases they studied involved at

At the risk of overdoing it with NAFTA Chapter 19 here on this blog, another question just occurred to me. The bi-national panel system for reviewing domestic AD/CVD decisions started in the Canada - U.S. FTA, and was then brought into NAFTA.  But it has never been used

From the Institute for International Law and Justice, NYU School of Law: The IILJ is co-organizing a conference in Buenos Aires, on 12 December 2017 on: “Thinking a Global Trade Governance for the 21st Century: Challenges and Opportunities on the Eve of the WTO´s 11th Ministerial Conference.” Abstracts

This is from the WSJ: President Donald Trump said his administration would take its time in making a long-awaited decision on whether to block steel imports, saying “we don’t want to do it at this moment.” Mr. Trump and his Commerce Secretary, Wilbur Ross, had earlier this year

This is from blog reader and occasional commenter Adrián Vázquez Benítez, a Mexican trade lawyer: AFTER CHAPTER 19 NAFTA ELIMINATION: WHO WILL DEFEND US? USTR recently announced its objectives regarding the renegotiation of NAFTA, one seeking to remove Chapter 19 "Review and Dispute Settlement in Antidumping and Countervailing Duty

This is from Chad Bown: Figure 1 illustrates the United States’ use of [trade remedies] over the NAFTA period of 1994–2016, as well as a projection for potential use in 2017 (more on this below). Each line represents the share of US imports from a different foreign source that

Here are some excerpts from an old law review debate about the constitutionality of CUSFTA Chapter 19: Alan Morrison of Public Citizen: If the meaning and applicability of the laws of the United States dealing with antidumping and countervailing duties are enunciated and given legally binding effect in decisions directly