|
|
|
|
#1
02-10-08, 06:27 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Really not how it happened. The WTO regs explicitly state that no member nation will be required to accept any business that is in violation with its own laws.
The crux of the debateis the fact that no other nation has anything remotely resembling US federalism (the separation of federal and state jurisdiction and thus, law). The US (federally speaking) has a clearly written law that makes it illegal to use electronic means to wager on sporting events (the Wire Act). In and of itself, that would normall exempt the US from having to allow its citizens to gamble on such events online. However, there is a carve-out in the law, that permits electronic wagering (in those states that allow it) on horse racing. From the outside, that looks protectionist and thus in violation of the WTO regs. In reality it isn't, but there is an understandable disconnect. Most non-US entities have a hard time grasping that in the US, the federal government, in many cases, has zero authority to determine what is and is not legal in the several States. Its a dichotomy. On constitutional grounds(since the US Constitution supercedes international agreements), the US is correct vis-a-vis the WTO. On rational libertarian grounds, the US govt is wrong on gambling in general.
__________________
"Animals die, friends die, and I shall die. But the one thing that will never die is the reputation I leave behind." Old Norse adage |
|
#2
02-12-08, 12:00 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Urgh what a very complicated situation we have here.I have studied a bit off polotics it is something i am really intrested in.I really do have a problem with understanding how state law can override federal law.I suppose it is a bit like the european community overriding british law something else that i have trouble getting to grips with lol.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
