5 ms·
Good points, though those cases hinged on the argument that Argentina had, in its bonds, expressly waived sovereign immunity and made New York the forum for any
by HillRat 10y ago
Good points, though those cases hinged on the argument that Argentina had, in its bonds, expressly waived sovereign immunity and made New York the forum for any legal action. Even so, the 2nd Circuit ruled against attempts to seize Argentinian Central Bank assets, setting a reasonably high bar for future attempts at recovery.
Personally, I'm with you -- I think the Argentina cases had somewhat delicate international ramifications (traditionally, the assumption has been that international investors take their chances, and that the market would punish any country that defaulted), but even so, JASTA really does upend international law in a new and troubling way.
- Iv 10y agoI am really against the notion that waiving sovereignty is something that elected leaders are allowed to do. It is too easy to design a deal that will benefit one leader but open the country for pillaging under its successor.