TransCanada Corporation made its intention clear in January to recover costs through arbitration for Obama refusing the company a permit for the Keystone XL pipeline. It is filing its claim for $15bn in damages under North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) provisions.
Now a secret tribunal made up of corporate lawyers will determine if US taxpayers have to ante up $15 billion in order to not allow an environmentally hazardous pipeline to cut across the USA.
TransCanada took a risk that it might not get the presidential permit, as required by law. The management took a risk, and now via an unconstitutional secret tribunal they may be able to require US taxpayers to cover their losses.
Some of the biggest US investors in TransCanada include JP Morgan/Chase, Vanguard Corporation, and Prudential.
These companies are circumventing US law via the unconstitutional rules of NAFTA.
If the US government loses, there is no reason why we as taxpayers should not launch a class action lawsuit challenging these secret tribunals of NAFTA as unconstitutional. Since the US Supreme Court has ruled that corporations are people, a challenge can be issued under the equal protection clause of the US Constitution, which should render illegal the secret tribunal provision of NAFTA, depending on how corrupt the US courts are.
John Hively's Blog: News and Analysis of the War Against the Middle Class 
Ah, but you see, NAFTA is a Treaty and as such does not need to conform to the Constitution. The Constitution only address the establishment of such treaties, it does not limit their scope and nature, which is the god damned things are so damned dangerous!!!!
LikeLike
But NAFTA is not a treaty! A treaty requires 2/3rds of the senate vote for it. The president then can sign the treaty. The North American Free Trade Agreement is an agreement, not a treaty because it did not receive 2/3rds of the senate vote. It received only 61 if I remember correctly. Moreover, a treaty is not required to pass through the House of Representatives. NAFTA was forced to pass through the House because it is an agreement. In addition, even if NAFTA was a real treaty, the requirements of it could still not overrule the US Constitution. So, for example, if our government successfully negotiated a treaty eliminating our voting rights, that would be unconstitutional, and the treaty would likely be overturned by the US courts.
LikeLike