[MUSIC] Hey. Check it out. In this session, we look at two cases involving the trans-boundary movement of waste. The first is from the United States and arises under the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Which gives regulation of interstate commerce in the United States to the federal government, but not to the states. In City of Philadelphia versus New Jersey, City of Philadelphia had contracted to send its solid waste, its garbage, to land disposal facilities in New Jersey. New Jersey adopted a law that prohibited the importation into New Jersey of any out of state waste. In this Supreme Court case, City of Philadelphia versus New Jersey, the Supreme Court struck down the New Jersey law as a state trying to erect a barrier to interstate trade. Even in bads like waste, it is trade nonetheless. Struck down. At the international level, there was an analogous case recently in 2007, between the European community on the one hand, and Brazil on the other. Brazil adopted a rule designed to stop the importation from Europe of certain retreaded tires, because they were viewed as a health hazard. Europe claimed that was an unfair trade barrier under the General Agreement on Tariff and Trades in the World Trade Organization, trade work that we've looked at before. It went to a WTO panel, which held this time, that an exception in the world trade organisation articles, allows a state to erect barriers when necessary to protect human health, and that Brazil had articulated enough of a scientific reason to justify its ban.