Stephen Zamora - University of Houston Law Center Faculty Blog http://www.uhlawblog.com/stephen-zamora.html Professor Zamora earned a B.A. degree from Stanford University in 1966 and a law degree from the University of California at Berkeley (Boalt Hall) in 1972, where he graduated first in his class and served as Chief Articles Editor of the California Law Review. Prior to joining the faculty of the University of Houston Law Center in 1978, he practiced international law in Washington, D.C., first as an associate in the law firm of Clearly, Gottlieb, Steen and Hamilton, and then as an attorney with The World Bank. He has been a Senior Fulbright Lecturer in Mexico, and has been a visiting professor at Yale Law School and Fordham Law School. An expert on NAFTA, in 1996, Zamora served as a member of a dispute resolution panel that decided the first government-to-government dispute under NAFTA (U.S. v. Canada -- Dairy, Poultry and Eggs from the United States). Professor Zamora is a member of the American Law Institute, of the American Society of International Law, and of the American Society of Comparative Law. In 2006, he received the highest distinction awarded by the Mexican government to a foreign national, the Order of the Aztec Eagle, in recognition of his work in promoting U.S. - Mexican understanding. He is the lead author of the book Mexican Law, published in 2004 by Oxford University Press, and has authored numerous articles and book chapters on international economic law, international banking law, international trade law (NAFTA), international monetary law, and Mexican law. Professor Zamora's areas of expertise include contracts, international banking law, international transactions, Mexican Law, and NAFTA. en-us Copyright 2010 Tue, 08 Jul 2008 16:49:32 -0600 Tue, 27 Jul 2010 09:53:36 -0600 http://www.movabletype.org/ http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss Note: Banco Nacional de Cuba v. Sabbatino According to Gary Born, International Civil Litigation in U.S. Courts (3d ed, 1996), at 688, Sabbatino relied in significant part on domestic separation of powers considerations.  

]]>If Congress tried to eliminate the Act of State Doctrine, I would expect the law to be challenged on domestic constitutional grounds the first chance anyone had to raise the issue

]]> http://www.uhlawblog.com/2008/07/articles/issues-of-the-day/note-banco-nacional-de-cuba-v-sabbatino/ http://www.uhlawblog.com/2008/07/articles/issues-of-the-day/note-banco-nacional-de-cuba-v-sabbatino/ Issues of the Day Tue, 08 Jul 2008 16:49:32 -0600 Stephen Zamora Questions for Prof. Bush I wasn’t aware of the SD Texas case – was it brought by an affected party, or by the government? Does it raise the FSIA issue the of commercial activities exception to sovereign immunity? 

]]>It could be an important precedent in this regard, since the 1979 opinion on this issue was issued by a District Court.

Repeal of the Act of State Doctrine has been suggested by a number of writers, but I am not aware that Congress has ever seriously considered passing a law to do away with the doctrine. Such a law would be challenged as unconstitutional, since many experts believe that the Act of State doctrine has constitutional underpinnings in separation of powers.

The oil and gas industries are very strange, volatile industries, and for governments that are overly dependent on oil production as a major source of their foreign exchange, controlling production appears a logical economic policy. As far as the U.S. suing OPEC, I would rather see a multilateral solution, rather than a U.S. unilateral one – maybe replace OPEC with an “OPEIC” (Organization of Petroleum Exporting and Importation Countries), to try to bring some balance to supply and demand. Oops, there I go – forgetting that the market is supposed to do that. But the oil market is so volatile.

I do sympathize with the developing country members of OPEC.

]]> http://www.uhlawblog.com/2008/07/articles/issues-of-the-day/questions-for-prof-bush/ http://www.uhlawblog.com/2008/07/articles/issues-of-the-day/questions-for-prof-bush/ Issues of the Day Mon, 07 Jul 2008 12:04:14 -0600 Stephen Zamora Response to Darren Bush op-ed The last time OPEC was sued over price fixing (IAM v. OPEC, in the 1970s), the U.S. District Court ruled that OPEC lacked legal personality to be sued as an entity. 

]]>The lawsuit proceeded against the individual OPEC governments, but was dismissed on the grounds that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) made the governments immune from suit. The court in that case ruled that the commercial activities exception contained in FSIA did not apply, the court interpreting the governmental activity to be protection of natural resources, not price fixing. See IAM v. OPEC, 477 F. Supp. 1097 (C.D. Calif. 1979), affd on other grounds, 649 F. 2d 1354, cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1163 (1982)

Link to the LA Times op-ed via  http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-first19-2008jun19,0,7991948.story

]]> http://www.uhlawblog.com/2008/07/articles/issues-of-the-day/response-to-darren-bush-oped/ http://www.uhlawblog.com/2008/07/articles/issues-of-the-day/response-to-darren-bush-oped/ Issues of the Day Thu, 03 Jul 2008 13:24:59 -0600 Stephen Zamora