3 ms·

I'm not aware of any US law that states: "an entity must do business in any given foreign country" nor any US law that states: "an entity must not terminate

I'm not aware of any US law that states: "an entity must do business in any given foreign country" nor any US law that states: "an entity must not terminate a business in a given foreign country" Given that, I don't see any issue with a company choosing to exit or suspend business in Russia or the US for that matter.

willcipriano 5y ago
> an entity must do business in any given foreign country Here's some examples: https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/04/23/us-states-use-anti-boycott-laws-punish-responsible-businesses https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/04/23/us-states-use-anti-boyco...
- uberman 5y ago
  Those laws don't forbid a company from exiting or suspending international operations. They say that if you do so specifically in Israel, then a given US State government will not do business with you. While similar, it neither applies to Russia nor prohibits the suspension or termination of an international arm of your business.
  - willcipriano 5y ago
    You must do business with Israel or you will face these defined consequences. You must not murder someone or you will face these defined consequences. I don't see a distinction between the two. They both aim to stop a behavior with threats of punishment.
    - uberman 5y ago
      I personally see a clear distinction between punishment for a felony and a refusal by the State of RI to do "State business" with me or for that matter, being grounded for too much phone use. I guess you are entitled to your worldview.
      - willcipriano 5y ago
        "We aren't in violation of Roe vs Wade, no. We just passed a law that the state won't do business with a firm that has any employees that have ever had an abortion." These word games remind me of civil asset forfeiture, "oh no, we aren't charging you with a crime we are charging your car and cars don't have rights so we don't have to have a trial. Hand over the keys."

willcipriano 5y ago

> an entity must do business in any given foreign country Here's some examples: https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/04/23/us-states-use-anti-boycott-laws-punish-responsible-businesses https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/04/23/us-states-use-anti-boyco...

uberman 5y ago
Those laws don't forbid a company from exiting or suspending international operations. They say that if you do so specifically in Israel, then a given US State government will not do business with you. While similar, it neither applies to Russia nor prohibits the suspension or termination of an international arm of your business.
- willcipriano 5y ago
  You must do business with Israel or you will face these defined consequences. You must not murder someone or you will face these defined consequences. I don't see a distinction between the two. They both aim to stop a behavior with threats of punishment.
  - uberman 5y ago
    I personally see a clear distinction between punishment for a felony and a refusal by the State of RI to do "State business" with me or for that matter, being grounded for too much phone use. I guess you are entitled to your worldview.
    - willcipriano 5y ago
      "We aren't in violation of Roe vs Wade, no. We just passed a law that the state won't do business with a firm that has any employees that have ever had an abortion." These word games remind me of civil asset forfeiture, "oh no, we aren't charging you with a crime we are charging your car and cars don't have rights so we don't have to have a trial. Hand over the keys."