reverses the Panel's finding that, because the United States did not enter into consultations with Antigua, the United States was not able to justify the Wire Act, the Travel Act and the Illegal Gambling Business Act as “necessary” to protect public morals or to maintain public order;
as regards the chapeau of Article ⅩⅣ,
as regards Article ⅩⅣ in its entirety,
modifies the Panel's conclusion in paragraph 7.2（d） of the Panel Report and finds, instead, that the United States has demonstrated that the Wire Act, the Travel Act, and the Illegal Gambling Business Act are measures “necessary to protect public morals or maintain public order”, in accordance with paragraph （a） of Article ⅩⅣ, but that the United States has not shown, in the light of the Interstate Horseracing Act, that the prohibitions embodied in those measures are applied to both foreign and domestic service suppliers of remote betting services for horse racing and, therefore, has not established that these measures satisfy the requirements of the chapeau; and …