CBA are all registered in the Bahamas), and the wage dispute at issue undoubtedly concerns the internal affairs of the ship. See McCulloch, 372 U.S. at 17, 83 S.Ct. 671 (to construe the Act to embrace the “internal discipline and order” of a foreign ship would be to impute to Congress the highly unlikely intention of departing from the established rule that the law of the flag state ordinarily governs the internal affairs of the ship). Plaintiffs, residents of India, have offered no reason to deviate from Congressional intent indicating the purpose of the NLRA is to the protect rights of “American workingmen,” (emphasis added) a purpose which has been reiterated in Benz, McCulloch, and Spector. Cf. State Bank of India v. National Labor Relations Board, 808 F.2d 526, 534 (7th Cir.1986) (<HOLDING>). Nor does the wage dispute otherwise center
holding market participant exception applicable to foreign commerce clause so as to shield state buy american law holding that united states admiralty jurisdiction extended not only to the high seas but also to american vessels in foreign waters holding that morrison precluded extraterritorial application of  10b to foreign securities transactions involving alleged wrongful conduct that could cause harm to american investors in the united states holding state buy american statute unconstitutional because it interfered with federal foreign affairs power emphasizing its effect on foreign commerce holding nlra applied to state bank of indias activities in the united states because most employees are american citizens or american residents and the labor dispute centers on the wages to be paid american residents foreign or natural 