North America

In 1999 the Supreme Court of Canada held that same-sex couples must be granted essentially the same rights as married couples.  On June 10 of this year the Court of Appeal of Ontario held that gays have a right to get married. The constitutional basis for the decision lay in the principles of human dignity and anti-discrimination. The federal government decided not to appeal this and similar cases, but instead to institute legislation toward the same effect.  Questions arise about the impact these developments might have on the gay community in the United States. 

 

President Bush, on April 25, announced that he would not grant safeguard relief from imports of Chinese wire garment hangers requested by the US industry under Section 421 of the Trade Act of 1974.1 In doing so the President rejected a unanimous recommendation from the US International Trade Commission that duties be raised for a three-year period.2 This is the second time relief has been sought under Section 421, and the second time relief has been denied by the Bush Administration.3

 

Background

On January 16, 2003, the WTO Appellate Body (AB) ruled that the U.S. Continued Dumping and Offset Act of 2000 (CDSOA) (also referred to as the "Byrd Amendment") is inconsistent with the WTO Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the GATT (the "Anti-Dumping (AD) Agreement") and the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures  (the "SCM Agreement"). [1]

On November 10, a dispute-settlement panel of the World Trade Organization (WTO) condemned the United States for banning online gambling. [1]   It did so at the request of one of the smallest countries in the world, Antigua and Barbuda.  The case was triggered when in 2000 a U.S. court sentenced Jay Cohen, a U.S. national and founder of the World Sports Exchange, to 21 months in jail for selling gambling services to U.S. citizens from the island of Antigua, in violation of the 1961 Wire Communications Act. 

 

            Under the headline quoted above, the New York Times on June 23 reported that the United States bowed to opposition within the U.N. Security Council and dropped its effort to obtain a Security Council resolution that would immunize its troops from prosecution in the International Criminal Court (ICC). [1]   It is important to understand just what this does and does not mean, particularly in the context of the continued presence of substantial numbers of U.S. military personnel in Iraq after the sovereign Interim Government of Iraq took office on June 28.