Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Gold Price Monitor -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: PaulM who wrote (45413)	11/29/1999 11:28:00 PM
From: banco$	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116764

U.S. Supreme Court to Review Myanmar (MA/Burma) Trade Law - U.S. Supreme Court to Review Myanmar Trade Law By James Vicini WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court agreed on Monday to review a Massachusetts law that restricts state purchases from companies that do business with Myanmar in a case about trade limits to protest human rights conditions in foreign nations. The high court said it would rule on the constitutionality of the Massachusetts Burma Law, which was adopted in 1996 in response to widespread human rights abuses by the military regime in the southeast Asian country. The case has far-reaching implications as a number of other states or cities adopted similar measures in the 1980s and 1990s involving Myanmar and other foreign nations. The ''selective purchasing law'' directs state officials to publish a list of companies doing business with Myanmar, which formerly was called Burma, and restricts the ability of those firms to sell goods and services to Massachusetts agencies. The justices will review a U.S. appeals court ruling that struck down the law as unconstitutional because it interferes with the federal government's exclusive power to set foreign policy and regulate foreign commerce. A federal law providing for economic sanctions against Myanmar -- adopted three months after the Massachusetts law -- preempts the state law, the appeals court ruled. The law effectively barred firms that do business with Myanmar from doing any business with Massachusetts and its state agencies by adding 10 percent to any bids received from such companies. The state adopted the law because Myanmar's military dictatorship has been accused of drug trafficking, torture and using slave labor. Massachusetts Attorney General Thomas Reilly defended the law in his appeal to the Supreme Court. Reilly said the law closely resembled the private boycotts and scores of divestment and selective purchasing laws adopted by state and local governments nationwide in the 1980s to protest against apartheid in South Africa. He said the appeals court ruling cast doubt on similar laws adopted by about 20 cities involving Myanmar as well as a number of state and local laws concerning Cuba, China, Northern Ireland, Nigeria and other countries. Reilly said the recent rise in global commerce and international trade agreements heightened the need for review of whether the state laws unconstitutionally interfere with foreign commerce and foreign affairs. He said the issue involved national importance and should be settled by the Supreme Court. Supporting Massachusetts were 14 other states, a number of cities with similar laws and a bipartisan group from Congress consisting of one senator and 54 members of the House of Representatives. The lawmakers said Congress has consistently refused to preempt state and local selective purchasing laws, including the Massachusetts law. A lawsuit challenging the law had been filed by the National Foreign Trade Council, a group that represents U.S. businesses. Lawyers for the group said the appeals court ruling was correct. Still, the lawyers said the Supreme Court justices should hear the case if they believed it raised unsettled issues. The justices will hear arguments in the case in the spring, with a decision due by the end of June. dailynews.yahoo.com