United States Sovereignty At Risk

The United States Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals which has in the past ruled in favor of assisted suicide, and declared “Under God” in the pledge of allegiance unconstitutional is taking up the case of United States sovereignty.

In France it is illegal to buy or sell Nazi memorabilia but in the United States it is perfectly legal. Yahoo’s France counterpart, Yahoo.fr, which is based in France abides by all French laws including the ban on Nazi merchandise. However Yahoo.com based in the US allows the purchase of such merchandise. Four years ago, France passed a ruling against Yahoo for breaking their laws. Yahoo took the case up with a federal judge in 2002 who ruled yahoo.com as an American company was not liable for the judgment. However the 9th circuit court ruled the judge ruled too quickly and overturned the ruling.

Today Yahoo received word that the case would be revisited by a full 11 judge panel.

What is at stake her is American sovereignty. If France wins this case imagine a United States that has to abide by the laws of every other country. What about the laws of Iran, North Korea, China, etc. Just another example of how the judges run this country.

story.news.yahoo.com.../ap/20050324/ap_on_bi_ge/yahoo_nazi_auctions


[edit on 24-3-2005 by BlackJackal]

NIce post, that is scarier than the Patriot act

Originally posted by BlackJackal
What is at stake her is American sovereignty.

Ummm...no...

What is at stake here is a US company doing business in a foreign country respecting that country's laws and being liable for any infringment.

Do you agree that a US company with a head office in say the Cayman Islands (to avoid US taxes) that sells a shody product in the US cannot be sued or is not liable for damages to US citizens?

And please do not let the fact that this happens to be France colour your judgment.
.

Originally posted by Gools
What is at stake here is a US company doing business in a foreign country respecting that country's laws and being liable for any infringment.

Do you agree that a US company with a head office in say the Cayman Islands (to avoid US taxes) that sells a shody product in the US cannot be sued or is not liable for damages to US citizens?

And please do not let the fact that this happens to be France colour your judgment.
.

Yahoo.fr does business and is based out of France and abides by France law. However Yahoo.com is based out of California which is in the US. Yahoo.com is the one being sued not Yahoo.fr. So yes it is US Sovereignty which is under discussion.

What is at stake her is American sovereignty. If France wins this case imagine a United States that has to abide by the laws of every other country. What about the laws of Iran, North Korea, China, etc. Just another example of how the judges run this country.

Many coutries do not allow the sale of certain items. This is nothing new, it has been going on for years.

BTW you mentioned the 9th circuit court which is the most overturned court in the US. Hello!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Originally posted by shots
Many coutries do not allow the sale of certain items. This is nothing new, it has been going on for years.

BTW you mentioned the 9th circuit court which is the most overturned court in the US. Hello!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That is correct that many countries do not allow the sale of certain items but, can another country dictate how an American Company does business when it has a division based in that country which abides by that countries laws?

Originally posted by BlackJackal
However Yahoo.com is based out of California which is in the US. Yahoo.com is the one being sued not Yahoo.fr. So yes it is US Sovereignty which is under discussion.

Sorry... but it is a US company that is being held liable for the actions of it's French subsidairy not the US government.

Your government is not being sued and a corporation has no sovereignty rights, only governments.

If I understand correctly, a judgement was brought against the French subsidiary which is hiding behind the skirt of it's US parent so the foreign court ruling is being applied to the parent company to be respected. This is what is called a "Conflict of Laws" situation (a course thought in law schools) and happens often when a multinational corporation does business around the world.

Originally posted by BlackJackal
... imagine a United States that has to abide by the laws of every other country. What about the laws of Iran, North Korea, China, etc.

When doing business in a foreign country? Absolutely!!

It's based on a legal priciple called "Reciprocity" (google)

Imagine that...
.


[edit on 3/24/2005 by Gools]

That is correct that many countries do not allow the sale of certain items but, can another country dictate how an American Company does business when it has a division based in that country which abides by that countries laws?

Absolutely they have every right to say what they can sell in their country, that however; will never prohibit them from selling that product where it is legal, will it?

I think you are confused on this issue, it has nothing to do with our Sovereignty, all it pertains to is what can or can not be sold legally in France.

Ok, why would you want to buy NAZI memorabelia in the first place, I think that the production and sale of such things should be prohibited world-wide.

Why are you asking that here? Why dont you do a quick google to see who puts Nazi memorabilia to use. Let me start you off:

WW2 Re-enactors
Hollywood
Historians
Museums
Collectors

As for banning it world-wide, good luck. Why don;t we all just stick our heads in the sand and pretend it all never happened, right?