Search: extraterritorial sanctions

...to veto by, in this case, Russia. Even if sanctions are imposed, will the UN be able to keep them in place? As the oil-for-food scandal makes clear, sanctions create a powerful moral hazard by raising the price of goods and creating the opportunity for huge profits, encouraging defection and cheating. Regardless of whether you agree with the logic of the invasion of Iraq, there is an important lesson there that is relevant to the problem of Iran. If the UN is unwilling or incapable of enforcing its own rules...

Marko Milanovic Roger, I also it might be useful to compare the extraterritorial applicability of the Constitution with jurisprudence on the extraterritorial applicability of human rights treaties, which poses very similar questions. Generally speaking, human rights treaties apply to territories under a contracting state's 'jurisdiction', defined in a leading European Court of Human Rights case, Loizidou, as any area under the state's effective overall control. You will certainly have noted that Justice Kennedy uses the word 'jurisdiction' in this functional sense as an exercise of power throughout his opinion. (see...

Alexander Panayotov The discussion is illuminating. I can hardly imagine a better panel to discuss Prof. Besson’s article given panelists’ recent contributions on different aspects of extraterritoriality. It’s hard to establish a consensus on extraterritoriality. I don’t think that such a consensus is even possible. Still, the introduction of normative theorizing raises a couple of open-ended questions. I will pose them because I think that normative theorizing about extraterritoriality is exceedingly difficult; thus, it entails a great deal of groundwork. I imagine that the article did not engage in this...

...domestic one with a weirdly constructed trigger, invoking a “law of nations” that we don’t mean the way other people mean it, argues strongly for a traditional approach to jurisdiction – it’s not universal jurisdiction anymore, because we’re not pretending that our reference point is actually universal, but instead merely a claim of extraterritoriality. So it doesn’t seem quite so strange that the Chief Justice would invoke the presumption against extraterritoriality, because the thing, the statute, that plaintiffs propose to apply extraterritorially isn’t truly a claim of universality, either. Nor...

...of Cuba’s argument that the U.S. embargo violates international law. I still think Cuba’s description of the U.S. embargo as a “blockade” is ludicrous. But I am more sympathetic to legal criticisms of the extraterritorial effects of the U.S. embargo. First, as the photo suggests, Cuba calls the U.S. embargo a “blockade”. Indeed, the billboard (which faces visitors as soon as they drive in from the airport), refers to the “bloqueo” as the “longest genocide in history.” This might be put down simply to rhetorical excess, but the Cuban government...

...1795 Opinion of the AG obviously affirmed expectations that the ATS is extraterritorial, applying to conduct of U.S. citizens on the coast of Africa. Moxon and Bolchos also affirm extraterritoriality when one recognizes the fact that foreign flag vessels are the equivalent of foreign territory under international law and tha conduct on such vessels is conduct in the territory of the flag, among other early cases. Adra was extraterritorial and the landmark Filartiga case was extraterritorial as have been so many cases post-Filartiga (especially Kadic, Presbyterian Church of the Sudan,...

...the UN Security Council resolution, but the legal and diplomatic costs would be much higher than withdrawing from a mere political commitment. Congress could also, unquestionably, override any domestic legal effects of a UN Security Council Resolution by passing a statute refusing to lift sanctions on Iran, or stopping the President from doing so. Diggs v. Shultz makes clear that a statute passed by Congress later in time than a Security Council resolution will have the force of law by operation of the last in time rule. But the legal...

[Anthony J. Colangelo is an Assistant Professor of Law at SMU Dedman School of Law] I summarized in a previous post my arguments that the presumption against extraterritoriality should not apply to the ATS to the extent courts use international law incorporated into U.S. common law as the rule of decision. The presumption was raised explicitly by the brief of the UK and Dutch Governments in Kiobel and will likely be raised again. This post addresses three discrete but related issues that may arise going forward: 1. Whether the ATS’s...

...beatings; sleep deprivation; sensory deprivation; forced nudity; stress positions; sexual assault; mock executions; humiliation; hooding; isolated detention; and prolonged hanging from the limbs. All of the Plaintiffs are innocent Iraqis who were ultimately released without ever being charged with a crime. They all continue to suffer from physical and mental injuries caused by the torture and other abuse. CCR makes a strong argument in the relevant brief that Al Shimari is precisely the rare ATS lawsuit that can survive Kiobel. First, CCR argues that Kiobel‘s presumption against extraterritorial application of...

...of human rights of home states, Buser suggests that the incorporation of extraterritorial obligations of human rights can guide the reform of international economic law to the direction of achieving better global justice. This extraterritorial human rights-based approach is helpful to persuade great powers, including emerging powers to balance the pursuit of their own state interests and the promotion of welfare of individuals around the world. I wonder, however, that it can serve as a major approach towards delivering more global justice. First, as Buser notes, the work of the...

Jordan Response... And what would be the Exec. attempted justification for the extraterritorial reach of a so-called "U.S. common law" that quite obviously could not be binding under customary laws of war or treaty-based laws of war or other customary or treaty-based law on the foeign accused? No jurisdiciton still. John C. Dehn Jens and Jordan, I have never finished the companion article to my JICJ article explaining the U.S. "common law" approach to punishing war crimes. However, Jordan is on track regarding the focus of the article -- which...

...involve targeted killings. The first scenario is one of extraterritorial killing, and the territorial state (Pakistan) has not consented to the use of force within its boundaries. The second scenario is also extraterritorial, but the territorial state has in fact consented. The third scenario is likewise extraterritorial, but the killing does not take place on the territory of any state. Finally, the fourth scenario is intraterritorial. So, what does international law have to say about these scenarios of targeted killing, again all of which take place outside armed conflict? I...