Pierre Goes Online: Blacklisting and Secondary Boycotts in U.S. Trade Policy
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The extraterritorial application of U.S. economic sanctions and trade controls is a perennial topic of discussion among international trade practitioners and a frequent cause for concern abroad. While long present in one form or another as part of several U.S. trade and export control programs, there has been a resurgence in the use of unilateral extraterritorial trade regulation by the United States following the unraveling of widespread international consensus on who should be the targets for such controls and sanctions as a result of the breakup of the Soviet Union, and the demise of the international Coordinating Committee on Multilateral Export Controls. Moreover, the pressures created by rapidly developing new means of conducting domestic and international commerce online and over the Internet now exacerbate the problems created with these types of controls,by vastly increasing both the number of international transactions and the speed with which they are conducted. The most recent focus of the discussion of unilateral extraterritorial controls in the popular and academic press has been the Helms-Burton Act, which revised the terms of the U.S. embargo of Cuba. The amendments to the Cuban embargo controls that the Helms-Bwton Act introduced have generated significant opposition from other countries, such as Canada and the United Kingdom. Additionally, the European Union has expressed its opposition through the initiation of a complaint with the World Trade Organization. Rather than the novel changes brought about by the Helms-Burton Act alone, however, it is the long-standing use of traditional tools as part of the government's trade regulation and sanctions programs that most clearly highlights the difficulties inherent in unilateral extraterritorial controls. Using the Cuban embargo program as an example, this Article explores the question of the leg'timacy of these blacklisting measures under international standards, including those advocated and espoused by the United States itself in connection with the Arab League's boycott of Israel. An emerging rule of customary international law, the Article concludes, proscribes the use of blacklisting to conduct international secondary boycotts.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it