Economists, politicians, trade activists, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and members of numerous private sector organizations have already pronounced the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement (TPP) dead on arrival. Misunderstandings run rampant concerning this proposed free-trade arrangement, which involves nine countries: the United States, Canada, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Chile, Peru, Brunei, Vietnam and Singapore. For example, recently the presidential hopeful Donald Trump declared that the TPP gives China an advantage, but of course, China is not even a member of the TPP.
While the TPP is very controversial and politicized, and while it may never be passed by Congress, it is incumbent on lawyers and law professors to apply their objective assessment to the TPP provisions that are most closely related to their field: dispute resolution processes. This will allow for a more balanced and mature debate regarding the future of the TPP as it proceeds through the congressional process.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
