PINAR DEL RIO


support babalú


Your donations help fund
our continued operation

do you babalú?

what they’re saying


bestlatinosmall.jpg

quotes.gif

activism


ozt_bilingual


buclbanner

recommended reading





babalú features





recent comments


  • antonio2009: It seems that you have recuperated back to your usual self. Felicidades.

  • Gusano: ¡que comebola!

  • asombra: “Cubans who think differently but have common values.” Right. Values like the continuation of the Castro system with...

  • asombra: “Fierce defenders of Cuban sovereignty.” Which one? The one that was turned over to Soviet Russia for 30 years until...

  • asombra: Carlos, at least Weissenstein is not Cuban, which makes him better than Saladrigas. As for the “independents,” well,...

search babalu

babalú archives

frequent topics


elsewhere on the net



realclearworld

Hearing set for challenge of Florida’s Cuba/Syria law

A federal judge in Miami has set a June 25, 2012 hearing for Odebrecht's challenge of the new Florida law restricting state and municipal contracts being awarded to companies who do business with the ruthless and murderous regimes in Syria and Cuba.

Apparently, Odebrecht's attorneys will argue that the multi-billion dollar company has a constitutional right to profit from blood money.

Via the AP on Bloomberg:

Hearing set on Fla. firm's challenge to Cuba law

A June 25 hearing has been set for a Florida construction company's challenge to a state law banning governments from doing business with firms that have economic links to Cuba and Syria.

A federal judge in Miami approved an expedited schedule for the challenge filed by Odebrecht Construction Inc. The Coral Gables-based company is a subsidiary of a Brazilian conglomerate that has a separate unit working to expand Cuba's port of Mariel.

Odebrecht is asking the judge to issue a temporary injunction blocking the law from taking effect as scheduled July 1. The company says it could be prevented from bidding on billions of dollars in government contracts.

The lawsuit claims the law is unconstitutional because foreign policy powers rest solely with the federal government.

Comments are closed.