Search: extraterritorial sanctions

...As to your point, I guess we do have some sort of governance "crisis" or "problem", simply because the Treaties do not include a contingency plan for a financial crisis of the current proportions and the control mechanisms proved inadequate. This is based on serious design flaws of the TFEU. Take the deficit rules in Art. 126 TFEU for instance. Countries are obliged not to exceed certain deficit levels. If they do, they need to reduce them to appropriate levels or they may face sanctions. However, sanctions are not automatic...

...that, by virtue of passing and implementing such a statute, the U.S. has violated a treaty. Presumably the U.S. must risk suffering whatever international law sanctions are appropriate for such a breach. But that's not very unusual, is it? Isn't the whole point of the "last in time" rule that later-enacted statutes trump earlier ratified treaties for purposes of domestic law and, more importantly, for purposes of the Supremacy Clause? That is to say -- Congress *often* enacts "last in time" statutes that effectively violate treaties, or that breach federal...

...other hand, it is not clear that with the Cotton letter there is a "measure" of the U.S. involved. Indeed, one can frame the letter as defending more obvious measures of the U.S., like the Security Council-authorized sanctions regime. I would be very hesitant to define "measures" as "executive foreign policy but not relevant legislation". Or what about a candidate who promises to sign a treaty if elected? And then of course there is Snowden. Jordan Eugene: a statement by a politician is not correspondence sent to a foreign govt....

...that is all about political commitment and then verified compliance by all sides with their commitments. I don't think the legal character of the agreement will have any bearing on how well it is implemented. That will depend solely on the political will of all parties. I'm far more concerned about the US not abiding by its commitments relating to sanctions than I am about Iran abiding by its commitments to freeze its nuclear program and agree to an additional protocol with the IAEA. William Worster Setting aside the many,...

...conduct of trial"). Concerning your last phrase: It is my understanding that the power to impose penal sanctions for the crimes defined in the statute is distinct from the question of power to sanction contempt of court: In-compliance with the rules of procedure (e.g. contempt of court) is neither a criminal offense nor an infraction (which are material law). Fine or detention penalties for such conduct are sui-generis sanctions of procedural law (at least in continental law). As procedural jurisdiction powers are explicitly assigned through Art. 15, the power to...

Kyla4u Quote: "But other governments have a reciprocal incentive to sign on: we report on offshoring that’s hurting you, you help us out with offshoring that hurting us." Reciprocal reporting has very little to do with the incentive to sign onto FATCA. The incentive for signing an IGA has a lot more to do with the 30% sanctions imposed by the US on all US payments to any FFI who does not comply with FATCA. By signing an IGA, foreign governments greatly reduce the risk of having 30% sanctions applied...

...mean for us lawyers? It means that the Security Council and the US/EU should back off of their increasing use of economic sanctions - a tool that also has alot of literature on it, all saying that in a case like Iran's nuclear program, economic sanctions are not going to cause the desired change in target state behavior (let me know if you want cites on this). It means that we should seek for creative legal/political means to allow Iran to continue its uranium enrichment program, while giving the West...

...is just a tool? Tools may be designed badly or used improperly, but there is no immorality in a tool, just in their improper use. Despite the fact we have numerous laws and traditions in the US to control the improper use of automobiles, there are about 50 thousand deaths a year. Should this unavoidable result be an excuse to ban the automobile? Sanctions against tools merely increase their costs. Given that transportation is easy and quick, nothing will keep tools out of a country where there is the money...

CM Kevin, I agree that the brief should have been accepted in the interests of justice. However, I also think that sanctions should be imposed on any counsel - prosecution or defence - who knowingly disobeys a scheduling order without good cause. I'm sure that counsel in this instance would argue that there was good cause; however, such behaviour by an experienced lawyer sets a dangerous precedent which, without proper investigation and the application of sanctions if deemed appropriate, may encourage lawyers / self-represented accused in other cases to manipulate...

Marty Lederman Thanks, Bill. Two quibbles: First, and most importantly, the Convention in Missouri v. Holland did *not* create "close seasons." If it had done so, then it would have imposed a legal obligation on Missouri hunters of its own accord, albeit one without any criminal or other sanctions attached. Paul's argument on Tuesday was that that was what the Migratory Bird Convention did, in fact -- which he said makes it distinguishable from the CWC, which does not impose any obligation on Carol Anne Bond. (As I wrote in...

...as Germany, Canada, the UK, and others breach the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. He does, rightly, acknowledge that these instruments do not “have much teeth”, but without explaining why or what changes are needed to advance the fight for vaccine equality. There are significant questions about the extraterritorial reach of the CRC that are too complex for a blog post, but it is the lack of a significant enforcement mechanism that is the real problem....

...consensus, rather than unilateral means. Unilateral extraterritorial regulation of the foreign-cubed variety, where one state purports to dictate conduct in another state’s territory, is in tension with international norms and basic principles of democracy. It’s also a perspective that believes human rights become universal not through some sort of predetermined inevitability, but only through careful building of alliances and legitimacy between different groups joined in purpose. The concern therefore should not be that U.S. courts will become the world’s courts. Rather it’s that any court, in any nation, can assert...