IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
MIDDLE DIVISION

MADE IN THE USA FOUNDATION,
1925 K Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20006)
)
)
)
and)
)
UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA,
AFL-CIO-CLC
Five Gateway Center
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222)
)
)
)
)
and)
)
LOCAL 12L, UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA,
c/o Mickey Williams
P.O. Box 2127
East Gadsden, Alabama 35903)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiffs,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Serve: U.S. Attorney and Attorney General)
)
)
)
)
)
___________________________________________________)


COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY, MANDATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
I.
Nature of the Case
1. This is a case challenging the constitutionality of the North American Free
Trade Agreement ("NAFTA" or the "Agreement"), on the ground that NAFTA is a
treaty which was not adopted with the concurrence of two thirds of the members
of the United States Senate.
II.
Parties
2. Made in the USA Foundation (MUSAF) is a nonprofit organization founded in
1989 to promote American-made products in the United States and overseas. MUSAF
is a membership organization with approximately 60,000 individual members in the
United States. Members of MUSAF include businesses, labor unions, and
individuals. The members of MUSAF desire to buy American-made products for
patriotic and economic reasons.
3. United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO-CLC ("USWA") is a labor organization
representing workers in numerous industries, including but not limited to the
basic steel, aluminum, rubber, allied ferrous and nonferrous metals producing
and fabricating industries. USWA has over 750,000 members, the vast majority of
whom work in the United States.
4. Local 12L, United Steelworkers of America ("Local 12L") is an affiliate of
the USWA representing workers at the facility of the Goodyear Tire and Rubber
Company ("Goodyear" or "the Company") in Gadsden, Alabama.
5. The United States of America is the federal government of the United States.
III.
Jurisdiction
6. Jurisdiction is conferred on this Court by 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (civil action
arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States), § 1337
(civil actions arising under any Act of Congress regulating commerce), § 1343
(civil actions for redress of deprivation of any right, privilege of immunity of
a citizen of the United States), § 1346 (civil actions against the United
States) and § 1361 (action to compel an officer of the United States to perform
his duty).
IV.
Factual Allegations and Cause of Action
7. NAFTA was negotiated by the President of the United States, initialed by him
on December 17, 1992, and submitted to Congress on November 4, 1993.
8. A majority of the members of the House of Representatives voted to approve
NAFTA on November 17, 1993.
9. A majority of the members of the United States Senate, but less than
two-thirds of the members present, voted to approve NAFTA on November 20, 1993.
10. NAFTA is a long-term agreement between the United States, Canada and Mexico
which is designed to form the three nations into a free-trade area and in large
measure to integrate their economies.
11. To that end, NAFTA provides for the staged elimination of tariffs on most
goods traded among the three member nations.
12. In addition to agreeing to eliminate tariffs on goods, in NAFTA the United
States makes far-reaching commitments to Canada and Mexico on virtually every
other subject affecting the economic relationships among the three nations,
including but not limited to commitments with respect to investment, financial
services, transportation, telecommunications, intellectual property, energy, and
cross-border trade in services.
13. NAFTA requires the United States to open federal government procurement to
suppliers from the other NAFTA member countries.
14. Under Chapter 19 of NAFTA, in proceedings brought to enforce United States
laws against dumping and unfair subsidies, the power of final decisionmaking is
surrendered to binational panels, and judicial review by United States courts is
not permitted.
15. Under Chapter 20 of NAFTA, whenever Canada or Mexico believes that a measure
taken or proposed by the United States "is or would be inconsistent with the
obligations of [the] Agreement or cause nullification or impairment" of "any
benefit [Canada or Mexico] could reasonably have expected to accrue to it" under
provisions of the Agreement, the dispute may be presented to a multilateral
arbitral panel, and, if the United States does not implement the panel's
decision, it is subject to economic sanctions.
16. The procedure described in paragraph 15 above can be used, inter alia, to
nullify or impede the enforcement of laws and regulations promulgated by the
United States or by state and local governments to protect health, safety, the
environment and consumers, if the arbitral panel characterizes such a law or
regulation as a barrier to trade.
17. In view of the provisions described in paragraphs 10-16 above, and NAFTA's
other provisions, NAFTA is a treaty within the meaning of Article II, Clause 2
of the Constitution of the United States.
18. In approving NAFTA, the Mexican legislature followed the procedure that
applies under Mexican law to the making of treaties; and the Government of
Mexico refers to NAFTA as a treaty, specifically, "Tratado de Libre Comercio de
America del Norte."
19. Article II, Clause 2 of the Constitution of the United States provides that
to make a treaty, "two thirds of the Senators present [must] concur."
20. Two thirds of the Senators present did not concur in the adoption of NAFTA.
Accordingly, NAFTA failed to attain the votes constitutionally required for its
adoption. Nevertheless, the defendant is treating NAFTA as if it had been
adopted.
21. As a direct result of the adoption and implementation of NAFTA, more than
2,000 United States establishments have moved their operations to Mexico.
22. Many prominent American corporations have moved entire factories to Mexico,
making it more and more difficult for members of Made in the USA Foundation to
buy American-made products. For example, RCA Corporation, the last American
television manufacturing company, moved its factory to Mexico from Indiana in
March, 1998. Other American establishments that moved to Mexico since NAFTA was
implemented include those that produced Eveready Batteries, Oshkosh overalls and
children's clothing and Champion athletic clothing.
23. NAFTA also has had a devastating impact on American agriculture. After NAFTA
went into effect, more than 1,000 United States farms employing approximately
100,000 workers closed due to a rising tide of imports of Mexican produce,
resulting directly from the adoption and implementation of NAFTA. This
development has been particularly devastating in Florida, where 120 of the
State's 200 tomato farmers have gone out of business as a direct result of the
adoption and implementation of NAFTA.
24. Mexican tomato growers are allowed to use many pesticides, including DDT,
which are banned in the United States. In addition, Mexican growers employ
children in tomato fields to harvest and pack tomatoes. NAFTA requires the
United States to allow the importation of Mexican tomatoes despite these
practices.
25. As a direct result of the adoption and implementation of NAFTA, imports into
the United States from Mexico have increased by more than 80 percent, vastly
exceeding any increase in exports from the United States to Mexico, with the
result that the United States, which had a $1.7 billion trade surplus with
Mexico in 1993, had a $14.5 billion trade deficit with that country as of 1997.
26. In addition, some American establishments have moved operations to Canada as
a result of NAFTA, and NAFTA has resulted in an increase in the United States's
trade deficit with Canada.
27. NAFTA has caused the loss of more than 400,000 American jobs. Members of
plaintiffs Made in the USA Foundation, USWA and Local 12L are among those who
have lost employment due to NAFTA.
28. More than seven thousand workers represented by the USWA, at more than
thirty locations, have been certified by the United States Department of Labor
as having lost employment due to NAFTA, because of the movement of American
operations to Mexico and Canada and/or increases in imports from Mexico and
Canada.
29. One of the locations at which employees have been so certified is the
Gadsden, Alabama facility of Goodyear, represented by Local 12L. At that
location, certain operations connected with tire manufacturing have been moved
by Goodyear to Canada as a result of NAFTA.
30. Jobs have been lost at other USWA-represented Goodyear facilities as a
result of a movement of operations to, or increased reliance on imports from,
Canada and Mexico caused by NAFTA. This has occurred at the Goodyear facilities
in Green, Ohio, Topeka, Kansas and Lincoln, Nebraska.
31. As a result of the job losses described in paragraphs 28-30 above, and other
losses of jobs resulting directly from NAFTA, the plaintiff USWA has lost
members.
32. As a direct result of the adoption and implementation of NAFTA, numerous
employers have threatened to move operations to Mexico unless the plaintiff USWA
and its members accept lower pay and benefits than they otherwise would receive.
This has impeded the collective bargaining efforts of USWA and has resulted in a
diminution of the pay and benefits of many of its members.
33. The plaintiff USWA has been forced to utilize scarce resources to study and
to combat the negative effects of NAFTA. This plaintiff has worked to educate
the public and members of Congress about NAFTA's impact on working people, and
has allocated significant numbers of personnel to work on providing services to
members who have lost their jobs due to NAFTA or who are faced with the threat
of losing their jobs due to NAFTA.
REQUEST FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, plaintiffs request that this Court enter an order:
A. Declaring that NAFTA, having failed to be approved by two-thirds of the
Senators then present, is null, void and of no effect;
B. Directing the President of the United States to provide notice within 30 days
to the governments of Mexico and Canada that the United States is invoking its
power to terminate NAFTA;
C. Awarding plaintiffs their costs and reasonable attorneys' fees; and
D. Ordering such other relief as the interests of justice may require.
Respectfully submitted,

___________________________________
JOEL D. JOSEPH
1925 K Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20006
(202) 822-6060
Attorney for Plaintiff Made in the
USA Foundation


___________________________________
CARL B. FRANKEL
General Counsel
United Steelworkers of America
Five Gateway Center
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222
(412) 562-2400


__________________________________
JEREMIAH A. COLLINS
Bredhoff & Kaiser, P.L.L.C.
1000 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
Suite 1300
Washington, D.C. 20036
(202) 833-9340
Attorneys for Plaintiffs United
Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO
and Local 12L

___________________________________
JOE R. WHATLEY, JR.
Cooper, Mitch, Crawford, Kuykendall
& Whatley
505 20th Street North
1100 Financial Center
Birmingham, Alabama 35203
(205) 328-9576
Attorneys for Plaintiffs