For those seeking general background on Investor State Dispute Settlement, check wikipedia's intro. This is an important, critical issue in developing progressive trade theory and practice. Bottom line: US corps sought immense bilateral and NAFTA (also TPP) trade advantages by agreements endorsing the rights of US companies to sue trading partner governments not just for Bolshevik style nationalizations, but also for any reforms that might affect their bottom line, or tax obligations to the partner. Trade agreements founded on mutual benefits were corrupted significantly by fees and other sanctions used to punish less powerful partners, who might not, for example, be able to afford the millions in legal fees to prosecute their cases in US Courts (also preferred in agreements).
Its interesting that protests from progressives on this matter were negated by the commercial forces dominating most negotiations, but now gain ground among right wingers worried that OTHER existing and emerging "investor states" (competitors, not allies to Trump) may reciprocate.
Jared drills into the details.....
ISDS and the US
-- via my feedly newsfeed