Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T10:37:20.106Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Untied States District Court, District of Massachusetts: National Foreign Trade Council V. Baker

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2017

Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Judicial and Similar Proceedings
Information
International Legal Materials , Volume 38 , Issue 3 , May 1999 , pp. 664 - 669
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

26 F. Supp. 2d 287 (D. Mass. 1998).

References

1 Baker, Charles D.,the Secretary of Administration and Finance of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts,and Philmore Anderson, III,the State asing Agent for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.Google Scholar

2 Act of June 25, 1996, Chapter 10, § 1, 1996'Mass. Acts 210, codified at Mass. Gen. Laws, Ch. 7, §§ 22G-22M.

3 A “ comparable low bid,” as defined by the statute, is one that is up to 10% higher than a bid from a company on the restricted list. Inessence, a company on the “restricted purchase list”can only win the bid if its offer is at least 10%lower than the lowest bid by an unrestricted company.

4 Plaintiff NFTC, a nonprofit corporation, has strongly advocated open international trade and investment since its founding in 1914.

5 The parties have stipulated that (1) more than thirty NFTC members are on the “restricted purchase list:” (2) some NFTC members have severed their business connections with Myanmar, thereby affecting their competiti'Ve edge in the global market; (3) at least one member, who had contracts with Massachusetts in the past, did not bid on·new contracts because of the statute; and (4) at least one member on the “restricted purchase list” lost a contract prior to joining NFTC because its bid was not 10% lower than the winning bid. See Joint Stipulation Cjiiji 30, 36-37, 32, and 38.

6 There are currently eighteen municipal sanction laws issued against Myanmar.See Joint Stipulation ¶44. Massachusetts, itself is planning to introduce similar legislation next year against Indonesia.Id. at exhibit 15.

7 North American Salt Co.v. Ohio Dept. oj'Iransp., 122 Ohio App.3d 213,_N.E.2d_, 1997 WL 447643 (Ohio App. 10 Dist. 1997) recently joined tllis line os state precedents, wherein the Court of Appeals of Ohio upheld an Ohio “Buy American” Statute