Obamatrade replicates the sovereignty-busting terms of NAFTA almost word-for-word.
Obamatrade would submit the U.S. to the jurisdiction of international tribunals established under the auspices of the United Nations or World Bank.
It would shift decisions over the payment of U.S. tax dollars away from Congress and outside of the Constitutionally-established Article III federal court system (or even U.S. state system) to the authority of international tribunals.
These UN and World Bank tribunals do not apply U.S. law, but rather international law set in the agreement. This includes a guaranteed minimum standard of treatment for foreign investors operating here set forth by “customary international law” and established in “principle legal systems of the world.” These international tribunals judge whether foreign investors operating within the U.S. are being provided the proper property rights protections.
The standard for property rights protection that is the basis for the award of U.S. tax dollars is not those established by the U.S. Constitution as interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court, but rather international property rights standards set forth in CAFTA, as interpreted by an international tribunal. “… when a claim is submitted…the tribunal shall decide the issues in dispute in accordance with this Agreement and applicable rules of international law.”
Obamatrade would surrender control of 544 million acres of public land – http://suttontherapy.com/wp-json/oembed/1.0/ a quarter of the entire U.S. land area – to international authorities.
Obamatrade would subject to the foreign tribunals’ judgment all contracts between the U.S. federal government and investors from Obamatrade nations – including subsidiaries of Chinese firms – that obtain mining, logging or other concessions, run a power plant or obtain a government construction contract on U.S. federal lands. They would be able to take their disputes with the U.S. government to the UN and World Bank tribunals while U.S. companies with identical contracts would go before domestic courts. This not only creates an unacceptable double standard, it cedes control of federal lands to international tribunals.