The Highest Court You've Never Heard Of (Do NAFTA judges have too much authority?)

When a Mississippi jury slapped a $500 million judgment on Loewen Group, a Canadian funeral-home chain, in 1995 for breaching a contract with a hometown rival, the company quickly settled the case for $129 million but then decided to appeal. But instead of going to a U.S. court, the Canadians took their case to an obscure three-judge panel that stands distinctly apart from the U.S. legal system. And that panel's decision cannot be appealed.

(Do NAFTA judges have too much authority?)

No actually the problem is we have some lawmakers and a POTUS who dones't know the meaning of "Dangerous & Reckless Entanglements" we were so richly warned about. If this warning had been listened too then this question would not have to be asked. Time for them to either get a clue or get voted out of office.

"how does some mechanism on a trade agreement that no one ever thought much about suddenly get used to open up a whole new appellate process around the U.S. judicial system?" That's a question a lot more people may soon be asking.

Something that should have been asked before anyone signed on the dotted line.

What's more, states and municipalities have also warned that their ability to govern is being compromised by "a new set of foreign investor rights."

Who's going to enforce unpopular NAFTA judgements? I used to laugh at the black helicopter crowd, but things change...

The author of the article states:

"The panels, using arbitration procedures established by the World Bank, were supposed to ensure that governments in the U.S., Mexico, and Canada would pay compensation to any foreign investor whose property they might seize.

"U.S. business groups originally demanded the investor-protection mechanism, noting that the Mexican government had a history of nationalizing its oil, electricity, and banking industries, including many U.S. assets."

Sounds alot like the following:

Amendment V, U.S.Constitution:

"...nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation."

I have been arguing for years that government regulations must be financed with a corresponding tax that is allocated to compensate the private property owners for the use of their property for public use, or the regulation is unconstitutional.

I think it is rather ironic that it took a "foreign investor" to exert an enumerated, U.S. citizen RIGHT, and a NAFTA "panel" to recognize and support that RIGHT.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.