Trade Law: The Protectionist Use of Antidumping Laws—Should the Law Be Changed?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The note questions the effectiveness and necessity of current antidumping laws in the United States, particularly in light of their detrimental effect on efforts to liberalize trading practices under North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement (FTA). The current source of justification for these laws, found in the principles of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), is questioned. Arguments for maintaining the status quo as well as arguments calling for a change to or abolition of the antidumping laws are examined. This note concludes that the economic interests of the United States, domestic producers and labor, and United States consumers would be better served, and the goals of NAFTA and the FTA more quickly attained, by abandoning the current United States antidumping laws. A more active application of antitrust law under section 2 of the Sherman Act and section 301 remedies, where it is necessary to protect important United States interests, is favored.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".