In association with the International Commission of Jurists

Search: extraterritorial sanctions

18 Apr

...sold parts of a chemical or biological weapon to a state-financed terrorist group such as al-Qaeda. The principle, however, is exactly the same. The principle isn't the same, in that the federal government made it illegal to do business with Al Qaeda, but not with the South African government at the time. As for what we "really want," do we "really want" 12 random jurors, rather than Congress, to decide whether to impose sanctions on a foreign government? Because the upshot of this decision is that a federal jury would...
18.04.09 | |

16 Apr

...part of its obligations under UN Charter Article 56, point to the UN's own obligation to "promote...respect for...human rights," and then argue that these obligations take precedence over the US's own obligations under the UN Headquarters Agreement. That's the winning argument, right? Wow. Jordan The U.S. permits some civil sanctions against human rights violators in its courts and there is no S/L in customary international law. I see no reason why a visa denial could not be a proper sanction response even if other sanctions might be more onerous. Tyler...
16.04.14 | |

19 Dec

...that -- I haven't studied the history closely). I'm not aware of an example where the Clinton Administration took that view, although, again, I'm hardly familiar with every case where it might have come up. To clarify: Of course it is the case (and the Clinton Administration said so) that certain treaties do not establish binding rules of conduct (e.g., criminal sanctions) for private parties without further statutory or regulatory action. But the question in this case is whether the treaty imposes an obligation on the Executive branch itself (and,...
19.12.06 | |

14 Aug

...again leaves international law at the mercy of powerful states. Why is it that the US, the EU, and Japan have been able to refuse to lift subsidies to their domestic industries in clear violation of WTO law? Because the aggrieved states are not powerful enough to impose retaliatory sanctions that would damage the violators sufficiently and make them change their ways. The US and EU are content to offer each other side payments so as to carry on with their patterns of subsidies, but when Cambodia or Mali wants...
14.08.05 | |

09 Mar

...the country on the other side to issue sanctions against the US or declare war on it. That's what "violation of international law" means. It shouldn't stop anyone from doing the right thing. For example, the US should repudiate the various Drug War treaties which purport to demand that various drugs be made illegal. This would theoretically be a "violation of international law" and would theoretically be grounds for all the other countries in the treaty agreements to implement sanctions or declare war on the US, *but they wouldn't do...
09.03.15 | |

08 Mar

...As the reporters’ notes to Section 431 (dealing with U.S. practice with respect to jurisdiction to enforce) explains, U.S. court orders to produce information located abroad “have not provoked the protests from other states that might be expected if such orders constituted extraterritorial exercises of jurisdiction to enforce.” In the Microsoft case, the fact that none of the foreign governments filing amicus briefs—including Ireland—has characterized the warrant in question as an extraterritorial exercise of jurisdiction to enforce seems conclusive. Dean Parrish directs most of his criticism at the Restatement (Fourth)’s...
08.03.18 | |

13 Jan

...and the demonstrable hostility in the DRC” against anyone who is critical of the government or anyone who is perceived to be “attacking the mining industry” are prohibitive factors. Using the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (TVPRA) the plaintiffs submit that the US is the appropriate forum as there is a legal basis for extraterritorial jurisdiction. The IRA bolster their jurisdictional argument by stating that, “the policymaking that facilitated the harms Plaintiffs suffered was the product of decisions made in the United States by Defendants…This case is brought under the...
13.01.20 | |

22 Jun

...U.S. stock exchange. That is a very large category of foreign corporations. The United States can also go after foreign corporations if there is some territorial nexus. The DOJ and the SEC take an expansive interpretation of territoriality, such that the payment of a bribe through a U.S. correspondent bank or the sending of an email sent through a U.S.-based email account is considered a sufficient territorial nexus to permit prosecutions of foreign companies for bribing foreign officials on foreign soil. So precisely how does the extraterritorial application of U.S....
22.06.12 | |

27 Jul

...foreign policy, Kal Raustiala traces the evolving concept from post-revolutionary American to late-nineteenth century imperialism, the Cold War, and our own era of globalization. He closes with a powerful explanation of America’s attempt to increase its extraterritorial power in the contemporary world. As American power has grown, its understanding of extraterritorial legal jurisdiction has expanded too. Throughout, Raustiala focuses on how the legal limits of territorial sovereignty have been tweaked to accommodate the expanding American empire. In addition to the OJ regulars, the discussion will be joined by three commentators:...
27.07.09 | |

05 Nov

...climate change, to suggest that relevant human rights obligations lie solely with the State wherein harm is suffered. Rather, one must strike a balance between drawing attention to and clarifying human rights obligations applicable within vulnerable States on the one hand (i.e., domestic application), and drawing attention to and clarifying extraterritorial human rights obligations on the other-especially obligations applicable to those countries that bear the major responsibility for having caused climate change. These countries argue, rightly, that to fail to strike such a balance would be to consign vulnerable States...
05.11.09 | |

23 Apr

...Bellinger over at Lawfare can rightly claim credit for keeping the extraterritoriality issue before the Supreme Court in Kiobel. Indeed, the Supreme Court’s conclusion that “principles underlying” the presumption against extraterritoriality apply to claims under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS) represents a victory for the Bush Administration’s legal position in ATS cases, an administration John served with distinction. That Bush Administration legal position, however, marked a sharp break with past positions of the United States Government regarding extraterritorial application of the ATS. In 1980, the Carter Administration argued in Filartiga...
23.04.13 | |

08 Mar

as the extraterritorial application of statutes, the rise of universal jurisdiction, and the “dollarization” of less developed countries, those borders remain fundamentally important in areas such as immigration and enforcement jurisdiction. Moreover, in each area in which territoriality has declined, the reasons for decline have differed. The abandonment of national currencies has been driven by economic motivations and competitive forces, while the extraterritorial application of statutes has been driven more by changes in ideas, with the evolution of approaches to extraterritoriality paralleling changes in thinking about the conflict of laws....
08.03.06 | |