General Discussion

Sgent

(5,857 posts)

43. They could be sued

Tue Jul 5, 2016, 08:33 AM

Jul 2016

using the ISDS procedure, and if its proven that they have violated the treaty, be subject to fines or economic sanctions.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

72 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The Trans-Pacific Partnership clause everyone should oppose - By Elizabeth Warren [View all] FreakinDJ Jul 2016 OP

TPP ISDS and the Democrats Arizona Roadrunner Jul 2016 #1

so u are saying Cryptoad Jul 2016 #36

Post removed Post removed Jul 2016 #40

Define lying. JEB Jul 2016 #41

Depends on the definition of "is" LiberalLovinLug Jul 2016 #49

Not necessarily. Motown_Johnny Jul 2016 #68

KnR - Has Warren weighed in with the Dem Platform Committee on this? 99th_Monkey Jul 2016 #2

I'm sure she's discussed much higher than that. Hortensis Jul 2016 #12

Back then Warren was still claiming the agreement would not be released until 4 years AFTER Hoyt Jul 2016 #3

it can't happen here, right? tell it to NAFTA, a JV version of TPP Gabi Hayes Jul 2016 #5

TransCanada has also filed a suit in US courts out of desperation. They will be lucky to get Hoyt Jul 2016 #6

There's lots of hoopla when the government is sued, but we've never lost an ISDS suit bhikkhu Jul 2016 #24

Lost several times to Canada on softwood lumber, though not strictly ISDS (was NAFTA / WTO). nt Bernardo de La Paz Jul 2016 #54

never lost? dynamo99 Jul 2016 #67

From a government fact sheet: bhikkhu Jul 2016 #69

Well, if something was a bad idea sulphurdunn Jul 2016 #13

Not sure it was a bad idea in the past. Hoyt Jul 2016 #25

Maybe it wasn't, sulphurdunn Jul 2016 #29

Again, can't just look at things from your or my perspective. We live in big world and are 1%ers to Hoyt Jul 2016 #30

I doubt the idea is to make war reparations sulphurdunn Jul 2016 #33

You mean those shoes with $1 material, .05 labor and sold for $150? dbackjon Jul 2016 #62

Yea, that shoe. sulphurdunn Jul 2016 #70

I knew that variations of that clause were in Hortensis Jul 2016 #14

I like Warren, but on this issue she was either not well informed or preying on people not knowing. Hoyt Jul 2016 #27

My BS detector is ringing loudly . . FairWinds Jul 2016 #48

She was still claiming that back then. Look up her comments if you don't believe it. In fact, there Hoyt Jul 2016 #64

I call BS on ya . . FairWinds Jul 2016 #65

this is what TPP says at its own FAQ page: Gabi Hayes Jul 2016 #4

At the time OP article was written, she had not read the document. Probably hadn't read NAFTA, UN Hoyt Jul 2016 #7

I understand, and was researching for my warren link while you posted. Gabi Hayes Jul 2016 #8

They are ignoring the existing ISDS decisions that contradict those fears bhikkhu Jul 2016 #10

The TPP FAQ raises a straw man. sulphurdunn Jul 2016 #20

Another page with information: bhikkhu Jul 2016 #9

thanks for the info,and I hope your prognostication proves Gabi Hayes Jul 2016 #11

17 months old. . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Jul 2016 #15

The primary battle continues ... 1StrongBlackMan Jul 2016 #52

If elected president, Hillary will almost certainly sign the TPP into law Don Draper Jul 2016 #16

I hope she eliminates Malaysia from the agreement since human trafficking is legal there. I cannot floriduck Jul 2016 #61

Two quick questions... FreeJoe Jul 2016 #17

Make some kind of enforceable penalty for breaking trade laws? nt Rex Jul 2016 #19

Isn't that what this is about? FreeJoe Jul 2016 #21

You tell me. Rex Jul 2016 #22

They could be sued Sgent Jul 2016 #43

You mean I shouldn't just support things, because my friends are doing it? Rex Jul 2016 #18

February 2015 - is that clause still in the TPP 18 months later? George II Jul 2016 #23

That is why Trans Canada is suing the US for $15,000,000,000 SusanLarson Jul 2016 #26

I think courts and ISDS will call it the same. Hoyt Jul 2016 #28

And they will lose. joshcryer Jul 2016 #32

The US has never lost an ISDS case. joshcryer Jul 2016 #31

There is a first time for everything. Chan790 Jul 2016 #35

Sure, but US standards are the baseline. joshcryer Jul 2016 #38

As if past judgements in any way affect future cases brentspeak Jul 2016 #50

US has lost several times for its actions against Canada re softwood lumber Bernardo de La Paz Jul 2016 #53

An unfortunate article from Warren Egnever Jul 2016 #34

So, you are claiming EW doesn't know what she is talking about? modestybl Jul 2016 #46

Clearly she didn't when she wrote that Egnever Jul 2016 #55

In what way.. modestybl Jul 2016 #57

That the US has never lost a case in Egnever Jul 2016 #58

And more actual text to point out the nonsense that that claim is Egnever Jul 2016 #59

Oh,,,,,,, the Sky is Falling and its name is TTP Cryptoad Jul 2016 #37

TPP is not a trade agreement" so much as a treaty. DirkGently Jul 2016 #39

Real secret Sgent Jul 2016 #44

Top-secret for years, as we all know. Nice link though! DirkGently Jul 2016 #45

The same as every other negotiation throughout history Egnever Jul 2016 #56

Not before the vote to fast-track it though, eh? DirkGently Jul 2016 #71

So what? Fast track doesn't change a thing Egnever Jul 2016 #72

K &R Quantess Jul 2016 #42

As usual, Warren is spot on with her assessments IgelJames4 Jul 2016 #47

And Remember the 1993 NAFTA vote and . . FairWinds Jul 2016 #51

And DON'T Call The TPP . . FairWinds Jul 2016 #60

more crapitalism. pansypoo53219 Jul 2016 #63

Excellent catch Senator Warren. avaistheone1 Jul 2016 #66