Stratos Pahis
@stratospahis.bsky.social
Associate Professor, Brooklyn Law School.
I teach and write about international economic law (trade, investment, sovereign debt), public international law, and arbitration.
I teach and write about international economic law (trade, investment, sovereign debt), public international law, and arbitration.
The paper is available here: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
Are Investment Treaties Redundant? Evidence from Investor-State Disputes
<br>
<p><span>This Article analyzes a novel dataset of 318 ICSID investment treaty arbitrations to answer a fundamental question: <i>Do international investment
papers.ssrn.com
January 23, 2026 at 8:06 PM
The paper is available here: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
The podcast is available here:
Apple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/s...
Spotify: open.spotify.com/episode/2sPn...
YouTube: youtu.be/CRliAoMvb-U?...
Direct: andrewkjennings.com/2026/01/22/s...
Apple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/s...
Spotify: open.spotify.com/episode/2sPn...
YouTube: youtu.be/CRliAoMvb-U?...
Direct: andrewkjennings.com/2026/01/22/s...
Stratos Pahis on Investor-State Dispute Resolution
Podcast Episode · Business Scholarship Podcast · 01/22/2026 · 25m
podcasts.apple.com
January 23, 2026 at 8:06 PM
The podcast is available here:
Apple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/s...
Spotify: open.spotify.com/episode/2sPn...
YouTube: youtu.be/CRliAoMvb-U?...
Direct: andrewkjennings.com/2026/01/22/s...
Apple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/s...
Spotify: open.spotify.com/episode/2sPn...
YouTube: youtu.be/CRliAoMvb-U?...
Direct: andrewkjennings.com/2026/01/22/s...
Reposted by Stratos Pahis
First was a great conversation with @stratospahis.bsky.social on a nuanced view of investor-state dispute resolution on the @busscholarship.bsky.social www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRli... (2/6)
Business Scholarship Podcast - Ep.270 – Stratos Pahis on Investor-State Dispute Resolution |
YouTube video by Business Scholarship Podcast
www.youtube.com
January 23, 2026 at 4:05 AM
First was a great conversation with @stratospahis.bsky.social on a nuanced view of investor-state dispute resolution on the @busscholarship.bsky.social www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRli... (2/6)
If it’s ham and Swiss, you must dismiss
November 6, 2025 at 9:39 PM
If it’s ham and Swiss, you must dismiss
The charge was baloney
November 6, 2025 at 9:13 PM
The charge was baloney
The fact that the administration chose tariffs instead of those other more effective means of restricting imports shows that revenue generation is in fact major purpose of the tariffs. Common sense and the President’s own statements lead to the same conclusion.
November 5, 2025 at 9:49 PM
The fact that the administration chose tariffs instead of those other more effective means of restricting imports shows that revenue generation is in fact major purpose of the tariffs. Common sense and the President’s own statements lead to the same conclusion.
In any event, if the goal was actually to stop all imports--as the Solicitor General suggested--then quotas or blockades would be a much more effective tool.
November 5, 2025 at 9:49 PM
In any event, if the goal was actually to stop all imports--as the Solicitor General suggested--then quotas or blockades would be a much more effective tool.
That argument strikes me as very weak and almost self-rebutting. The expected revenue from the tariffs is $2 trillion over the next decade. To call that revenue "incidental" is absurd.
November 5, 2025 at 9:49 PM
That argument strikes me as very weak and almost self-rebutting. The expected revenue from the tariffs is $2 trillion over the next decade. To call that revenue "incidental" is absurd.
The SG also repeated more than once that the way you could tell these are “regulatory tariffs” is that they would be most effective in reaching their goals if no one ever paid the tariff (meaning they led to a complete halt to imports).
November 5, 2025 at 9:49 PM
The SG also repeated more than once that the way you could tell these are “regulatory tariffs” is that they would be most effective in reaching their goals if no one ever paid the tariff (meaning they led to a complete halt to imports).
This argument is key to the government's case that IEEPA's language "regulate...importation" authorizes the tariffs here and that they pass constitutional muster.
November 5, 2025 at 9:49 PM
This argument is key to the government's case that IEEPA's language "regulate...importation" authorizes the tariffs here and that they pass constitutional muster.
The Solicitor General emphasized over and over that the IEEPA tariffs are “regulatory tariffs” not “revenue raising” tariffs, and that any revenue was merely incidental to the tariffs.
November 5, 2025 at 9:49 PM
The Solicitor General emphasized over and over that the IEEPA tariffs are “regulatory tariffs” not “revenue raising” tariffs, and that any revenue was merely incidental to the tariffs.
But yes of course if any former/current USTR folks want to speak on or off the the record, please DM me!
October 28, 2025 at 3:52 PM
But yes of course if any former/current USTR folks want to speak on or off the the record, please DM me!
Yes - I have had some helpful off the record conversations so far have confirmed the theory - not quite sure what to do with that in the paper though, since it's not quite scientific and in any event the paper obviously takes a different methodology...
October 28, 2025 at 3:52 PM
Yes - I have had some helpful off the record conversations so far have confirmed the theory - not quite sure what to do with that in the paper though, since it's not quite scientific and in any event the paper obviously takes a different methodology...
Very helpful to think through this - thank you - and more comments very much welcome!
October 28, 2025 at 3:38 PM
Very helpful to think through this - thank you - and more comments very much welcome!
But ultimately I think defiance would have actually threatened greater and more permanent damage to the institution by undermining its legitimacy - which (unlike appointments) is not something that can't be restarted on a dime.
October 28, 2025 at 3:38 PM
But ultimately I think defiance would have actually threatened greater and more permanent damage to the institution by undermining its legitimacy - which (unlike appointments) is not something that can't be restarted on a dime.
As far as defying being a less forceful, I'm not sure I agree. Perhaps more spectacular, yes...
October 28, 2025 at 3:38 PM
As far as defying being a less forceful, I'm not sure I agree. Perhaps more spectacular, yes...
But perhaps the US saw refusing to participate as a bridge too far - if so then the question becomes why? And I think that just brings us back to why would the US view the process as so important...
October 28, 2025 at 3:38 PM
But perhaps the US saw refusing to participate as a bridge too far - if so then the question becomes why? And I think that just brings us back to why would the US view the process as so important...
Yes - thank you - that is a great point that is worth unraveling. As I envisioned it, at least in its most extreme form, defiance would have included refusing to participate in AB proceedings, which would have made it no less costly than objecting to AB appointments.
October 28, 2025 at 3:38 PM
Yes - thank you - that is a great point that is worth unraveling. As I envisioned it, at least in its most extreme form, defiance would have included refusing to participate in AB proceedings, which would have made it no less costly than objecting to AB appointments.
Many thanks to @harlangcohen.bsky.social, @aratojulian.bsky.social Gregory Shaffer, Petros Mavroidis for their comments.
More comments very welcome!
Paper is available here: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
More comments very welcome!
Paper is available here: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
An Autopsy of the Appellate Body and the Rule of Law
<p>Once the “crown jewel” of the World Trade Organization (WTO), the Appellate Body wielded compulsory jurisdiction over more countries and more agreement
papers.ssrn.com
October 28, 2025 at 2:47 PM
Many thanks to @harlangcohen.bsky.social, @aratojulian.bsky.social Gregory Shaffer, Petros Mavroidis for their comments.
More comments very welcome!
Paper is available here: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
More comments very welcome!
Paper is available here: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
I close by drawing on those insights to offer three strategies for enhancing the resilience of our international institutions during this era of great upheaval, and for, perhaps, reviving WTO dispute settlement in the next.
October 28, 2025 at 2:47 PM
I close by drawing on those insights to offer three strategies for enhancing the resilience of our international institutions during this era of great upheaval, and for, perhaps, reviving WTO dispute settlement in the next.
I then tease out various lessons from this account for international law and international trade law, including:
✅ The power and limitations of international law,
✅ The complementary nature of international legal theories,
✅ And the productive and destructive force of legal formalism.
✅ The power and limitations of international law,
✅ The complementary nature of international legal theories,
✅ And the productive and destructive force of legal formalism.
October 28, 2025 at 2:47 PM
I then tease out various lessons from this account for international law and international trade law, including:
✅ The power and limitations of international law,
✅ The complementary nature of international legal theories,
✅ And the productive and destructive force of legal formalism.
✅ The power and limitations of international law,
✅ The complementary nature of international legal theories,
✅ And the productive and destructive force of legal formalism.