While LOST proponents argue that the United States will choose available arbitration mechanisms to avoid legal decisions from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) or the International Tribunal for theLawofthe Sea (ITLOS), such arbitration panels are no-less perilous for U.S. interests as the decisive, "swing" arbiters would be appointed by generally unfriendly UN-affiliated bureaucrats.
The federal law allowing arbitration instead of litigation is riddled with exceptions Congress even exempted car dealers and active-duty military personnel from parts of it and most retail transactions would be untouched.
The board also will oversee dispute resolution between retailers and union representatives, which will be subject to arbitration with decisions enforceable in a court oflaw in the country ofthe retailer.
Thelaw was designed to rein in judges who had repeatedly ignored contracts requiring arbitration, perhaps out of a deep-seated aversion to ceding control over litigation.
Long before there was an American Arbitration Association, antagonists in business and the professions who feared the abstrusities oflaw courts had a different means of alternative dispute resolution:the duel.