scholarly journals China – Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duty Measures on Broiler Products from the United States: How the chickens came home to roost

2015 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 287-335 ◽  
Author(s):  
THOMAS J. PRUSA ◽  
EDWIN VERMULST
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Panel Report ◽  
The Public ◽  
Price Effects ◽  
The Right

AbstractThe WTO Panel report on China – Anti-dumping and Countervailing Duty Measures on Broiler Products from the United States was circulated to Members on 2 August 2013. In the report, the Panel examined a variety of issues challenged by the United States under various provisions of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994, the Anti-dumping Agreement and the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures. The Panel upheld the United States' claims on the majority of the issues, which covered certain procedural aspects of the anti-dumping and countervailing investigations such as the right to disclosure of ‘essential facts', as well as the substantive determinations including costing issues, the imposition of the ‘all others' rate on the basis of ‘facts available’, the price effects' analyses, the sufficiency of the public notices, and others. Notably the costing issues that came up in the case, although decided mostly on procedural grounds, provide food for thought, and are likely to feature again in future disputes.

Driving under the influence of opioids: What prescribers should know

2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (6) ◽  
pp. 415-427 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph V. Pergolizzi, Jr, MD ◽  
Robert Taylor, Jr, PhD ◽  
John Bisney, MA ◽  
Jo Ann LeQuang, BA ◽  
Robert B. Raffa, PhD ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
The United States ◽  
Driving Under The Influence ◽  
Pain Patient ◽  
Prescription Medications ◽  
Negative Effects ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Central Nervous System ◽  
The Right

Opioids affect the central nervous system and are known to produce dizziness, sleepiness, mood changes, and other actions that in some people have a negative impact on psychomotor or mental performance. The negative effects can be exacerbated in persons who are taking other prescription medications or illegal substances. Opioid-abusing drivers clearly represent an unnecessary danger to the public; although the vast majority of patients taking prescription opioids for pain safely drive to work and other activities, a subset may be impaired, but not be aware of or recognize the problem. The majority of pain patients would likely be surprised to learn that the legal systems in most parts of the world, including most states in the United States, do not differentiate between a pain patient taking a prescribed opioid at the right dose and frequency, and an abuser taking an illegal drug. For example, in some parts of the United States, a driver may be initially stopped for a relatively minor offense and, if the officer notices that the driver is wearing a fentanyl patch, charged with driving under the influence of drugs (DUID). The present narrative review attempts to highlight the existing problem, the different legal thresholds for arrest and prosecution for DUID, and the challenge of trying to have zero-tolerance for driving under the influence of a drug used illegally, while at the same time not arresting legitimate patients who are taking pain medication as prescribed. There is a clear and present need for an integrated assessment and addressing of the current confounding situation.

A Triad of Crisis Communication in the United States

2012 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-21 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mahmoud Eid ◽  
Jenna Bresolin Slade
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Social Change ◽  
National Level ◽  
The United States ◽  
White House ◽  
The Public ◽  
System Collapse ◽  
Right To Communicate ◽  
The Public Sphere ◽  
The Right

The United States experienced a core-shaking tumble from their pedestal of superpower at the beginning of the 21st century, facing three intertwined crises which revealed a need for change: the financial system collapse, lack of proper healthcare and government turmoil, and growing impatience with the War on Terror. This paper explores the American governments’ and citizens’ use of social network sites (SNS), namely Facebook and YouTube, to conceptualize and debate about national crises, in order to bring about social change, a notion that is synonymous with societal improvement on a national level. Drawing on democratic theories of communication, the public sphere, and emerging scholarship on the Right to Communicate, this study reveals the advantageous nature of SNS for political means: from citizen to citizen, government to citizen, and citizen to government. Furthermore, SNS promote government transparency, and provide citizens with a forum to pose questions to the White House, exchange ideas, and generate goals and strategies necessary for social change. While it remains the government’s responsibility to promote such exchanges, the onus remains with citizens to extend their participation to active engagement outside of SNS if social change is to occur. The Obama Administration’s unique affinity to SNS usage is explored to extrapolate knowledge of SNS in a political context during times of crises.

The Right to Die: A Cross-National Analysis of Agenda Setting and Innovation

1995 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 479-501 ◽  
Author(s):  
J D Smith ◽  
H R Glick
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Great Britain ◽  
Agenda Setting ◽  
The United States ◽  
Right To Die ◽  
Policy Entrepreneurs ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Right ◽  
National Analysis ◽  
Cross National

Through theories of agenda setting and innovation, the origin, development, and enactment of right-to-die policy in four Western nations—the United States, the Netherlands, Germany, and Great Britain—are examined. Different social and government structures produced varied right-to-die politics in each of these countries, although similar issues received more emphasis in Europe. However, it is discovered that policy entrepreneurs, organizations, and governments are important in similar ways in moving the issue from the public to the governmental agenda and to policy innovations in each country. The paper is concluded with a discussion of elements to be included in a model of agenda setting and innovation and with a proposal for the application of theory to a wider range of policies.

scholarly journals Challenging the Carceral Imaginary in a Digital Age: Epistemic Asymmetries and the Right to Be Forgotten

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (19) ◽  
pp. 3-14
Author(s):  
Andrea J. Pitts
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Public ◽  
Collective Effort ◽  
Right To Be Forgotten ◽  
Criminal Histories ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Right ◽  
Epistemic Asymmetry ◽  
The Impact

This paper argues that debates regarding legal protections to preserve the privacy of data subjects, such as those involving the European Union’s right to be forgotten, have tended to overlook group-level forms of epistemic asymmetry and their impact on members of historically oppressed groups. In response, I develop what I consider an abolitionist approach to issues of digital justice. I begin by exploring international debates regarding digital privacy and the right to be forgotten. Then, I turn to the long history of informational asymmetries impacting racialized populations in the United States. Such asymmetries, I argue, comprise epistemic injustices that are also implicated within the patterns of racialized incarceration in the United States. The final section brings together questions regarding the impact of such epistemic injustices on incarcerated peoples and focuses specifically on the public availability of criminal histories in online search databases as a fundamental issue within conversations regarding digital justice. I thus conclude by building from the work of contemporary abolitionist writers to argue that the underlying concerns of an individualized right to be forgotten should be transformed into a collective effort to undermine societal carceral imaginaries.

Conclusion

2020 ◽  
pp. 159-182
Author(s):  
John Gastil ◽  
Katherine R. Knobloch
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
Governing Body ◽  
The Public ◽  
Democratic Reform ◽  
The Right ◽  
Ballot Measure

The book’s conclusion details how the Citizen’s Initiative Review (CIR) exemplifies the possibility for democratic reform. This chapter draws on the stories of several deliberative reforms to exemplify their possibilities and pitfalls. Tough some attempts at institutionalization have fallen flat, the CIR has expanded from a pilot in Oregon to a new governing body being tested and proposed across the United States. Other citizen-centered institutions, like juries, have seen similar expansion, bringing greater opportunity for self-governance to citizens across the globe. Though the diffusion of democratic reform may seem idealistic, once immovable policy can shift. One example reviewed in the chapter is same-sex marriage legalization, which swept through the United States as voters and politicians began to understand the perspectives of individuals and communities who had been denied the right to marry. In Ireland, a deliberative minipublic produced a ballot measure to legalize same-sex marriage that won public backing. The chapter, and book, concludes that democratic reform is possible but will not happen unless the public demands it—citizens, activists, politicians, and academics alike.

When Public Opinion Does Not Shape Foreign Policy

2017 ◽  
pp. 105-127
Author(s):  
Scott Lucas
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
The United States ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
The Public ◽  
The World ◽  
The Right

President Eisenhower easily swept to victory in 1956, defeating Adlai Stevenson, whom he had also beaten in 1952, despite crises and wars that had suddenly flared in Hungary and Egypt. When the events of 1956 are examined through public and private records, the president’s response to these crises appears to confirm his claim that he would not allow policy making to be hostage to the wishes of the public. Instead, he made clear time and again that he would proceed with what he thought was the “right” course for US interests, irrespective of the American public’s reaction to the policy or to his reelection campaign. At the same time, he was ready to invoke public opinion in the United States and throughout the world to try and bend other statesmen to his will.

The Refusal of the President to Give Notice of Termination of Certain Treaty Provisions Under the Jones Act

1921 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-41
Author(s):  
Howard Thayer Kingsbury
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Constitutional Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Merchant Marine ◽  
The Public ◽  
Foreign Governments ◽  
The Right

There has been much discussion, in the public press and elsewhere, of the refusal of the President to give notice, pursuant to Sec. 34 of the Merchant Marine Act of June 5, 1920, of the termination of so much of the treaties with various foreign governments as restricts the right of the United States to impose discriminating customs duties on imports in foreign vessels and discriminatory tonnage dues on foreign vessels entering the United States. So far as this discussion is concerned with the proposed policy of assisting the American merchant marine by thus discriminating against foreign shipping, it is not within the province of this comment to venture an opinion. So far, however, as criticism has been directed against this action of the President upon the ground that in thus failing or refusing to carry out this direction of Congress he has exceeded his constitutional rights, an interesting and important question of constitutional law, affecting international relations, is presented.

Citizenship and the Right of Entry into the Public Sphere

Eco-ethica ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. 31-45
Author(s):  
Robert Bernasconi ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Eighteenth Century ◽  
African Americans ◽  
Native Americans ◽  
Public Sphere ◽  
Chinese Americans ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Public Sphere ◽  
The Right

The emergence of citizenship out of subjecthood at the end of the eighteenth century presented a series of problems for which the United States, among other countries, seems to have been unprepared: it was unclear who qualified for citizenship, what privileges it afforded, and what duties it demanded. Nevertheless, this uncertainty could be manipulated pragmatically to take advantage of any given situation without regard for consistency or future implications. By examining the obstacles placed on the path to citizenship of Native Americans, African Americans, women, and Chinese Americans, this article shows how the (non-)category of the non-citizen was weaponized. Indeed the mistreatment of non-citizens becomes the best indication of the value of citizenship.

The Helsinski Declaration: Brobdingnag or Lilliput?

1976 ◽  
Vol 70 (2) ◽  
pp. 242-272 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harold S. Russell
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
The West ◽  
Department Of State ◽  
The Public ◽  
The North ◽  
American Press ◽  
The Media ◽  
To Come ◽  
The Right

On August 1, 1975 the Chiefs of State and other high representatives of 33 European countries, the United States, and Canada signed the Final Act of The Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) in Helsinki. This event, described as the largest meeting of European leaders since the Congress of Vienna or by the more enthusiastic as the largest such meeting in history, had been little discussed in the North American press and caught the American public largely unprepared. Logic dictated that such an impressive gathering had to have an equally impressive purpose, and editorial writers struggled to explain the significance of the occasion. The general conclusion was that the President had demeaned himself by recognizing Soviet postwar hegemony in Eastern Europe without any substantial quid pro quo. George Ball called it “a defeat for the West.” Much of this comment in the media was without benefit of the complex document actually signed at Helsinki, covering sixty printed pages, which was made available to the public only one week prior to the signing. The Department of State, concerned that euphoria over this event might lead to increased pressure for withdrawal of U.S. forces from Europe and for other forms of unilateral disarmament, played down the Conference as an exercsie which was primarily of interest to the allies of the United States and which in any case had not produced documents of a legally binding character. For those determined to oppose the Conference, this appeared to be some form of coverup, whereas to those who saw merit in the texts, this seemed to depreciate the usefulness of some important steps in the right direction. Confusion over a document as carefully drawn, as vague and full of interrelationships and loopholes as is the Final Act is natural, and the results of the Conference should provide many a scholar a rich harvest of material for study for years to come.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document