Vermont Bar Journal, Vol. 40, No. 2 Spring 2015, Vol. 41, No. 1 | Page 22

by Jared K. Carter, Esq.

Wanna Go to Cuba?
New Travel and Trade Rules Provide
Unique Opportunities for Vermonters
The Cuban Embargo:
A Legal and Historical Primer

On a warm spring afternoon in 1960,
President Dwight D. Eisenhower approved
a plan to embargo Cuban sugar, oil, and
guns. By June of that year, Eisenhower
upped the ante, ordering U.S. oil companies in Cuba to stop refining Soviet crude
oil. The cold war in the tropical Caribbean
had officially begun. In response, the fledgling government of Fidel Castro nationalized U.S. oil refineries. Not to be outdone,
Eisenhower struck back by reducing the
import quota of Cuban sugar by 95%. On
October 19, 1960, Eisenhower proclaimed
that all exports to the island nation of Cuba
would be prohibited. The Cuban Embargo
(el Bloqueo, or “the Blockade,” as the Cubans call it) had begun.
Less than three weeks later, John F. Kennedy was elected president and Congress
amended the Foreign Assistance Act authorizing him to establish and maintain an
embargo upon all trade between the United States and Cuba. Pursuant to this power, Kennedy ordered the Secretary of the
Treasury to prohibit “the importation into
the United States of all goods of Cuban origin and all goods imported from or through
Cuba ... [subject to] such exceptions, by license or otherwise, as [the Secretary] determines to be consistent with the effective
embargo hereby proclaimed.” While never officially confirmed, the story goes that
moments before Kennedy issued this proclamation embargoing trade, he ordered
his press secretary, Pierre Salinger, to find
and purchase 1,000 Cuban cigars - the last
unregulated trade between the two coun-

22

tries.
Loosened at times - President Carter established the United States Interest Section in Havana to help facilitate immigration - and tightened at others - President
Reagan increased sanctions during his tenure - the Cuban embargo was maintained
at the discretion of the president for nearly
thirty years. However, in 1992 Congress effectively took away the president’s power
to end the embargo by passing two laws:
the Helms-Burton Act and the Cuban Democracy Act. Under the Helms-Burton Act,
Congress gave itself the dubious power of
overriding the executive branch if it ever
attempted to end the embargo.1 Congress
did this despite a Supreme Court ruling
ten years earlier holding that such a legislative veto in the context of foreign affairs
was unconstitutional.2 The Cuban Democracy Act further codified the embargo by
prohibiting subsidiaries of U.S. companies
based in third countries from trading with
Cuba and severely limiting travel by U.S.
Citizens.3
In 2003, President Bush further tightened
the regulations prohibiting virtually all travel (unless specifically licensed by the U.S.
Treasury Department) and limiting family visits by Cuban-Americans living in the
United States to one visit every three years.
This prohibition was challenged in federal
district court here in Vermont by individuals
(including myself) with family members in
Cuba. We argued that such a stringent restriction on the ability of Cuban-American’s
to associate with their families violated the
First Amendment’s protection of familial
relationships. The Court never got to rule
on the substance of this claim because in

THE VERMONT BAR JOURNAL • SPRING 2015

2009, President Obama adjusted the embargo again and allowed for unlimited family visits to Cuba.
Despite the fact that Havana sits less
than ninety miles from Key West, for fiftyfive years the Cuban embargo has virtually prohibited all social, cultural, or economic interactions between the United States
and Cuba. Only individuals who qualified
for a license under the Treasury Department’s Cuban Asset Control Regulations,
were able to travel to Cuba. According to
a U.N. Resolution, passed by the General
Assembly twenty-three times, the economic impact of the embargo exceeds one trillion dollars.
Despite the virtual ban on trade and travel, for nearly a decade, I’ve been fortunate
enough to lead courses to Cuba (including
CLE-granting courses) pursuant to the licensing provisions set forth by the Treasury
Department. We’ve led courses exploring
the Cuban healthcare system with students
from the University of Vermont College of
Medicine, we’ve traveled to Cuba to learn
about the Cuban legal system with legal
professionals (including Vermont lawyers)
and visited organic farms as part of a food
systems and agriculture course. We’ve
walked the cobblestone streets of Old Havana and ridden in countless 1950s era cars
(outfitted with Soviet motors, of course) as
part of arts and photography courses. In
leading these courses, we’ve had a unique
opportunity to engage with civil society
in Cuba. We’ve heard about their ideas,
dreams, and hopes while, at the same time,
sharing our own experiences as Vermonters. And yet, these trips were severely limited by the strict licensing requirements set
forth by the United States g ݙ\