FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W224337636> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W224337636 startingPage "409" @default.
• W224337636 abstract "I. INTRODUCTION On July 8, 2004 the Office of Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) released a report entitled Busting Up the Cartel: The WTO case Against OPEC (Lautenberg Report).1 The Lautenberg Report contends that countries that are members of both the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC or the Organization),2 and that abide by OPEC-mandated oil production quotas, are thereby in violation of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) Article XI:1 prohibition on quantitative export restrictions.3 The Lautenberg Report concludes that the United States Trade Representative (USTR) should bring a claim against OPEC members at the WTO for their alleged violations.4 The Lautenberg Report is not the first challenge to OPEC's legitimacy emanating from the United States.5 OPEC has never been viewed favorably by the American public: the public's perception, [OPEC] epitomizes a greedy, rapacious international that preys on the American public in defiance of our one hundred and ten year tradition of market competition embodied in the Sherman Act.6 U.S. citizens have twice challenged the cartel-like nature of OPEC under U.S. antitrust laws.7 Both cases were dismissed, however: the first under the doctrine of sovereign immunity and the Act of State Doctrine;8 the second on the theory that, absent consent, there were no acceptable means for serving an international organization like OPEC with process, and, therefore, the court could not establish jurisdiction.9 These cases left Congress with the impression that it is either impossible or extremely difficult to sue OPEC.10 In response, Congress introduced a number of bills abolishing certain defenses and immunities that it perceived were standing in the way of a successful antitrust action against the Organization.11 Because no suit has since been brought, the question remains whether the judiciary will feel comfortable holding foreign oil-producing nations liable under U.S. antitrust laws. While it is not clear that a U.S. court can legitimately order foreign oil-producing nations to comply with U.S. standards of competition, it is clear that the WTO Dispute Settlement Body can legitimately require WTO members to comply with WTO standards of international trade.12 Accordingly, recent congressional efforts to challenge OPEC focus on OPEC's alleged inconsistency with the WTO.13 Although they are two of the most visible international economic institutions, OPEC, and the WTO are often associated with diametrically opposed players in the global economy: the WTO with the sometimes savage rules of the market and OPEC with the often demonized intergovernmental manipulation of prices.14 The first attempts to invoke WTO law to bust up the cartel were instigated by Representative Peter DeFa/io (D-OR).15 DeFazio was largely unsuccessful, however, in achieving sufficient support for his ultimate objective: to pass a bill that would require the USTR to initiate dispute settlement proceedings against OPEC nations that are members of the WTO.16 But in light of the recent tumult over high gas prices, there has been a renewed interest in DeFazio's cause from other offices on Capitol Hill, most notably from Senator Lautenberg.17 The Lautenberg Report provides the first detailed legal argument that a basis for pursuing OPEC members at the WTO exists. On July 8, 2004, Senators Durbin, Levin, and Reid-all of whom were apparently persuaded by the Lautenberg Report-joined Senator Lautenberg in introducing legislation to the Senate virtually identical to the bill introduced by Representative DeFazio,18 which is still pending in the House.19 While it remains to be seen whether increasing gas prices will be enough of an impetus to rally the rest of Congress behind either of these bills, their allegations raise an issue that is important to WTO jurisprudence irrespective of whether the bills are passed; namely, whether a country can be a member of OPEC and the WTO while simultaneously fulfilling its obligations to both organizations. …" @default.
• W224337636 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W224337636 creator A5027509825 @default.
• W224337636 date "2006-03-15" @default.
• W224337636 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W224337636 title "Conflicting Obligations for Oil Exporting Nations?: Satisfying Membership Requirements of Both OPEC and the WTO" @default.
• W224337636 hasPublicationYear "2006" @default.
• W224337636 type Work @default.
• W224337636 sameAs 224337636 @default.
• W224337636 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W224337636 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W224337636 hasAuthorship W224337636A5027509825 @default.
• W224337636 hasConcept C11413529 @default.
• W224337636 hasConcept C155202549 @default.
• W224337636 hasConcept C162324750 @default.
• W224337636 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W224337636 hasConcept C18903297 @default.
• W224337636 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W224337636 hasConcept C2776211767 @default.
• W224337636 hasConcept C2776949292 @default.
• W224337636 hasConcept C2777626329 @default.
• W224337636 hasConcept C2778890260 @default.
• W224337636 hasConcept C29122968 @default.
• W224337636 hasConcept C34447519 @default.
• W224337636 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W224337636 hasConcept C46295352 @default.
• W224337636 hasConcept C48103436 @default.
• W224337636 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W224337636 hasConcept C91306197 @default.
• W224337636 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W224337636 hasConceptScore W224337636C11413529 @default.
• W224337636 hasConceptScore W224337636C155202549 @default.
• W224337636 hasConceptScore W224337636C162324750 @default.
• W224337636 hasConceptScore W224337636C17744445 @default.
• W224337636 hasConceptScore W224337636C18903297 @default.
• W224337636 hasConceptScore W224337636C199539241 @default.
• W224337636 hasConceptScore W224337636C2776211767 @default.
• W224337636 hasConceptScore W224337636C2776949292 @default.
• W224337636 hasConceptScore W224337636C2777626329 @default.
• W224337636 hasConceptScore W224337636C2778890260 @default.
• W224337636 hasConceptScore W224337636C29122968 @default.
• W224337636 hasConceptScore W224337636C34447519 @default.
• W224337636 hasConceptScore W224337636C41008148 @default.
• W224337636 hasConceptScore W224337636C46295352 @default.
• W224337636 hasConceptScore W224337636C48103436 @default.
• W224337636 hasConceptScore W224337636C86803240 @default.
• W224337636 hasConceptScore W224337636C91306197 @default.
• W224337636 hasConceptScore W224337636C94625758 @default.
• W224337636 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W224337636 hasLocation W2243376361 @default.
• W224337636 hasOpenAccess W224337636 @default.
• W224337636 hasPrimaryLocation W2243376361 @default.
• W224337636 hasRelatedWork W117812655 @default.
• W224337636 hasRelatedWork W1557410072 @default.
• W224337636 hasRelatedWork W1971693378 @default.
• W224337636 hasRelatedWork W1974555297 @default.
• W224337636 hasRelatedWork W2257176724 @default.
• W224337636 hasRelatedWork W2258454627 @default.
• W224337636 hasRelatedWork W2290569956 @default.
• W224337636 hasRelatedWork W2373176273 @default.
• W224337636 hasRelatedWork W257436559 @default.
• W224337636 hasRelatedWork W2957037753 @default.
• W224337636 hasRelatedWork W3030562021 @default.
• W224337636 hasRelatedWork W3123823309 @default.
• W224337636 hasRelatedWork W3124596046 @default.
• W224337636 hasRelatedWork W3125054217 @default.
• W224337636 hasRelatedWork W3125282101 @default.
• W224337636 hasRelatedWork W3136178797 @default.
• W224337636 hasRelatedWork W3176072872 @default.
• W224337636 hasRelatedWork W177199931 @default.
• W224337636 hasRelatedWork W2119180133 @default.
• W224337636 hasRelatedWork W3124746930 @default.
• W224337636 hasVolume "38" @default.
• W224337636 isParatext "false" @default.
• W224337636 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W224337636 magId "224337636" @default.
• W224337636 workType "article" @default.