Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-02T22:39:53.433Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

U.S. Experience with WTO Dispute Settlement

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2017

Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 94 , Issue 4 , October 2000 , pp. 697 - 698
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See Murphy, Sean D., Contemporary Practice of the United States, 94 AJIL 531 (2000)CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

2 See id. at 375.

3 Gao, World Trade Organization: U.S. Experience to Date in Dispute Settlement System, Gao Doc, GAO/NSIAD/OGC-00–196BRat4–5 (June 2000) (footnotes omitted).

4 See 146 Cong. Rec. H4787–814 (daily ed. June 21, 2000); see also H.R.J. Res. 90, 106th Cong. (2000) (unenacted resolution). On the respective roles of the executive and legislative branches in terminating U.S. adherence to an international agreement, see Goldwater v. Carter, 481 F. Supp. 949 (D.D.C.), rev’d, 617 F.2d 697 (D.C. Cir.), vacated, 444 U.S. 996 (1979).