David and Goliath Case Study
David and Goliath At The WTO
Case Study
1. Jay Cohen was a citizen of the United States and was charged for violating the Wire Wager Act of 1961, which prohibited using wire communications for betting within the US or between the US & foreign countries. Jurors were not moved by his basic defense that a foreign government sectioned what the US made criminal. He showed courage by returning to the US from Antigua, but he was still tried as guilty. Despite the WTO complained that international trade rules are allowed to override domestic laws and regulations, the US still defied the WTO and adhered to its domestic gambling laws. In a sense it was somewhat justified.
2. In the end, the US was given a year to comply with the WTO rulings. It could have done so in two ways. It could have changed its laws to permit cross-border Internet betting or it could have banned all domestic online gambling, specifically horse racing. The US did neither. Congress defied the WTO by passing the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 to block bank payments for online bets, with the exception of horse racing bets. So in the end, I do agree with all the decisions that were made.
3. The WTO seeks to facilitate negotiated agreements between disputants. When mutually acceptable agreements are not reached, member nations take their disagreements to the formal dispute resolution process. After a lengthy semi-judicial process WTO bodies issue a ruling. The WTO has no power to enforce its rulings. It has no police powers and no authority to fine its members. It can, however, give nations the right to retaliate against other nations that refuse to accept a WTO ruling.
Ordinarily, retaliation takes the form of imposing or raising tariffs on products or services. The nation harmed by another nation’s use of prohibited trade barriers can impose concessions equal to the damages it has suffered or continues to suffer while the other nation refuses to comply.
Antigua sought to impose
Case Study
1. Jay Cohen was a citizen of the United States and was charged for violating the Wire Wager Act of 1961, which prohibited using wire communications for betting within the US or between the US & foreign countries. Jurors were not moved by his basic defense that a foreign government sectioned what the US made criminal. He showed courage by returning to the US from Antigua, but he was still tried as guilty. Despite the WTO complained that international trade rules are allowed to override domestic laws and regulations, the US still defied the WTO and adhered to its domestic gambling laws. In a sense it was somewhat justified.
2. In the end, the US was given a year to comply with the WTO rulings. It could have done so in two ways. It could have changed its laws to permit cross-border Internet betting or it could have banned all domestic online gambling, specifically horse racing. The US did neither. Congress defied the WTO by passing the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 to block bank payments for online bets, with the exception of horse racing bets. So in the end, I do agree with all the decisions that were made.
3. The WTO seeks to facilitate negotiated agreements between disputants. When mutually acceptable agreements are not reached, member nations take their disagreements to the formal dispute resolution process. After a lengthy semi-judicial process WTO bodies issue a ruling. The WTO has no power to enforce its rulings. It has no police powers and no authority to fine its members. It can, however, give nations the right to retaliate against other nations that refuse to accept a WTO ruling.
Ordinarily, retaliation takes the form of imposing or raising tariffs on products or services. The nation harmed by another nation’s use of prohibited trade barriers can impose concessions equal to the damages it has suffered or continues to suffer while the other nation refuses to comply.
Antigua sought to impose