For many years, animal rights groups and whale-protection societies in California had been campaigning against the killing of whales, especially in Iceland, Norway and Japan. The groups concede that whales are no longer an endangered species, but they maintain that killing whales is immoral since whales are unusually intelligent animals. In 2020, these groups succeeded in winning a popular referendum in California to enact a law called "Proposition 888- Save the Whales ". Proposition 888 requires the government of California to adopt a number of measures to punish and deter countries that allow whaling. First, Proposition 888 imposes a ban on "the purchase, consumption, and sale of whale meat or whale related products from abroad." This includes whale meat but also whale bone and whale blubber (which can be used in industrial products). This ban only applies to imported whale products because certain Eskimo groups in Alaska continue to hunt whales as part of their traditional practices. Bones from the whales they kill are used to sell traditional handmade products such as jewelry and sculptures that are sold at specialty stores in California. Second, Proposition 888 requires the California state government to label packaged seafood products from Japan with additional information as follows: "These products originate in Japan, a country that allows the indiscriminate commercial hunting of whales. Please consider this information before purchasing or consuming this product." The Proposition does not target Norway or Iceland because neither country allows commercial whaling. Finally, Proposition 888 also requires the California state government to impose a one percent "whale" tax on all products sold in the state from Japan one year from the date that the proposition becomes law (in 20120). The governor of California is authorized to suspend this tax if, in his opinion, Japan has sufficiently renounced commercial whaling to justify the suspension. The governor is instructed to make his determination independently without any consultation or negotiations with the Japanese government. You are an attorney at a law firm specializing in international trade disputes. The trade ministry of the government of Japan has contacted you seeking advice on how it may challenge Proposition 888 in the WTO dispute settlement system. The Japanese government does not want to adjust its policies, and is seeking advice only on how to challenge Proposition 888. It also informs you that Japan has never sought to export whale products to the U.S., nor has it ever planned to do so. Finally, the government tells you that it also has already separately sought advice from another law firm on whether it can challenge Proposition 888 for preemption under federal law, so it does not want your advice on that question. 6 Draft a short memo advising the Japanese trade ministry on the legal challenges they could raise against the California program under the WTO Agreements. Be sure also to discuss any defenses the U.S. might raise and evaluate the likelihood of Japan's success.