Pro Se Use of International Law

by Roger Alford

When I am reviewing developments regarding international law to report here on Opinio Juris, I regularly have to separate the wheat from the chaff. For every case I report about an interesting international law development there are a dozen others that I entertain. Those dog cases are surprisingly interesting and sometimes humorous. They provide a unique insight into the ways that international law is finding currency in domestic litigation. I thought you might find a review of such cases interesting, with a focus on pro se litigation cases.

There are numerous factual scenarios in which international law is invoked by pro se parties. Here is a sample from the past few weeks, starting with stronger cases and proceeding to the absurd. I will present the problem and you identify the international law issue. The answers are after the fold.

1. In Grinard-Henry v. United States, 2006 WL 2265416, defendants were 173 miles south of Jamaica in a stateless vessel. When the defendants realized they were being followed by the Coast Guard, they began to madly throw the bales of cocaine overboard. They were arrested and convicted of various drug offenses. In a motion to vacate, what is the international law argument?

2. In Morris v. State, 2006 WL 2872870, the defendant is on death row and since conviction he has been diagnosed with bipolar disorder. He argued on appeal that his death sentence should be reversed based, inter alia, on international law. What is the international law argument?

3. In Ballentine v. United States, 2006 WL 3298270, Ballentine brought an action claiming that he has been denied his right to vote in presidential elections because of his status as a United States citizen residing in the Virgin Islands, an unincorporated territory of the United States. What is the international law argument?

4. In United States v. Kabat, 2006 WL 2583314, defendants went to a Minuteman III nuclear missile site in North Dakota on the belief that the Holy Spirit had called them to dress up as clowns, display various banners, and damage government property at the nuclear site. They were charged and convicted with destruction of government property. What is the international law argument?

5. In Hummingway v. Bush, 2006 WL 3313324, plaintiff brought an action against George Bush, Kofi Annan, Tony Blair and other world leaders. The action was brought on behalf of all concerned citizens of the world who seek justice and truth. The goal of the lawsuit was to end the scourge of war, prevent future violations of fundamental human rights, and hold accountable those responsible for their crimes. What is the international law argument?

One Response

  1. Kabat looks a lot like a few recent cases (from England and Ireland) that Prof Heller has recently discussed on Opinio Juris.

Trackbacks and Pingbacks

  1. There are no trackbacks or pingbacks associated with this post at this time.