While Trump was taking these actions, Canada was strongly advocating for "rules-based trade"... and those rules say a country only takes these kind of retaliatory actions proportionately, in an emergency situation, or after you've successfully arbitrated a dispute. https://twitter.com/markusoff/status/1352049630893146114

Pursuing sanctions without clear justification or fair arbitration would be hypocritical federal trade policy. How do you take a leadership role in WTO reform while thumbing your nose at such rules?

The whole point of the NAFTA re-think (and pulling Canada-US ISDS) was to make it easier for governments to pursue the environmental regulations they believed to be in the public interest without fear of corporations threatening lawsuits/taxpayers paying hefty settlements.

Look carefully at Wednesday evening's executive order - the Biden administration is setting out its "acting in the public interest" defence IMO.
Still, the arbitrariness of policy changes for political reasons across administrations may give the Cdn investor some grounds.

I think there's an interesting set of arguments coming up for the Chapter 11 arbitration. Beyond that, having trouble seeing another road. Chapter 31 consultations? On what grounds do you see Keystone as a CUSMA violation eligible for state-to-state dispute process? (Genuine qtn)

And anything else I could contemplate puts Canada on very shaky ground legally and politically... in terms of looking hypocritical among global trading partners advocating for strong, workable rules.