Search: extraterritorial sanctions
12 Apr The Apartheid Reports: A Paradigm Shift on Israel/Palestine (Part I)
[Dr. Smadar Ben-Natan is an Israeli and international lawyer, and postdoctoral fellow at the University of Washington, Seattle. She studies the intersection of international law, human rights, and criminal justice in Israel/Palestine, and has published on Israeli military courts, POW status, torture, and extraterritorial human rights.] [A previous version of this commentary was published in Hebrew by the Forum for Regional Thinking, part of the Van Leer Jerusalem Institute. The author is a board member at B’tselem, one of the organizations discussed in this commentary.] Over the last 18 months,...
22 Jul Space Law at the Crossroads: Contextualizing the Artemis Accords and the Space Resources Executive Order
...Intergovernmental Agreement (ISS-IGA). The moniker comes from NASA’s mission to land “the first woman and the next man” on the Moon by 2024. More recently, NASA has released its constitutive principles (Artemis Principles). The latest move follows President Trump’s Executive Order (EO) promulgated in April 2020 which recapitulates the US policy on commercial recovery and use of space resources. The Order clearly stated that the US does not view outer space as “a global commons”—a term used to signify extraterritorial spaces with common-pool resources. The Accord is consistent with the...20 Apr Weekend Roundup: April 13 – 19, 2013
majority’s opinion may have made the ATS more robust by clearing up some issues, she agreed with other commentators that Justice Breyer’s concurrence took the better conceptual approach. Anthony Colangelo criticised the majority opinion for extending the presumption against extraterritoriality to causes of action, which as part of lex fori are by definition not extraterritorial. Also favouring the Breyer concurrence was John Knox, who was happy to see the presumption against extrajurisdictionality resurfacing. Alex Mills pointed out that by applying a presumption against total extraterritoriality, i.e. in foreign cubed cases,...26 Jul International Law in the U.S. Supreme Court: Professor Alford on Extraterritoriality
The joy of this project was making the kind of discovery Roger Alford recounts in his post. Alford’s chapter on international law as interpretive tool from 1901 to 1945 discusses, among other things, the Supreme Court’s various approaches to the extraterritorial reach of statutes during that period. Among these approaches was the government purpose test of Unites States v. Bowman (1922). It is interesting to compare Bowman to the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Morrison v. National Australia Bank. In Morrison, the Court applied the presumption against extraterritoriality to the...
05 May A Radical Shift in Libyan and International Priorities is Necessary to Protect Health and Save Lives in Libya
...CRC, the authorities must also seek international cooperation and assistance to boost their scarce resources to fulfill the right to health. The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has made clear that States must coordinate with each other in the allocation of responsibilities, including by cooperating to provide “humanitarian assistance in times of emergency” and “contribut[ing] … to the maximum of its capacities.” The obligations under the ICESCR and the CRC are set out at greater length in the Maastricht Principles on Extraterritorial State Obligations in the Area of...20 May Guest Post: The Human Rights Impact of Drone Strikes
...greater fidelity to traditional understandings of international law. (Harold Koh, the former Legal Advisor to the U.S. Department of State, made similar pleas around transparency during his May 7 speech at Oxford.) These are all critical points that Congress and others should be hearing, but I would like to shift the focus—away from U.S. responsibilities and on to the responsibilities of the States that consent to the use lethal force on their territories. This is part of the “drone” discussion (or, to be more accurate, the “extraterritorial use of lethal...20 Oct Why the CIA and Drones?
...is that the role of judicial review over extraterritorial targeting decisions is highly limited, at most, even when US citizens are involved. The accountability as such is between the political branches. Many people, including me, have urged the USG to greater transparency as to legal review and standards, not as some supposed legal obligation, but as an important tool for political accountability and legitimacy. (3) The CIA has been given an important diplomatic and political task in conducting operations in Pakistan that, up until recently and perhaps even still today,...20 Apr Andrew Kent on the Case Against a Global Constitution
...the Quasi-War and Seminole War.” But Kent notes that simply because the Constitution does not govern extraterritorial uses of coercive force, it does not mean that the Founders considered such actions extra-legal. The law of nations constrained the U.S. government’s actions abroad. If you will recall this exchange between the Solicitor General Paul Clement and Justice Souter in the recent oral argument in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, you understand the gravity of Kent’s position. The modern application of Kent’s argument is that if the writ cannot be suspended, it does not...24 Jan A Response to Kevin Jon Heller by Carsten Stahn
...offer a broader basis for jurisdiction (i.e. prosecution of extraterritorial acts), curtail the applicability of statutes of limitation or extend the prospects for cooperation and judicial assistance. Moreover, in practice, domestic and international crime labels are de facto often interrelated in a domestic setting. Many jurisdictions rely on a mix of ‘international’ and ‘ordinary crime’ definitions in order to try offences, or adjust modes of liability to capture the conduct in question. These factors are not taken into account in the Heller’s ‘cost-benefit’ analysis. Paradoxically, in existing practice, ‘ordinary crime’...09 Jan Double Jeopardy and Crimes Committed Abroad
...this case raises unusual issues of dual sovereignty and double jeopardy. The only reason that Yakoob is subject to the double jeopardy problem is because the United States has imposed extraterritorial criminal penalties for crimes committed by Canadians in Canada. It’s much harder to argue that both Canada and the United States have dual sovereignty claims, or at a minimum that the United States’ claim to sovereignty is equal to that of Canada’s. Can someone more conversant in the area help me out? Is anyone aware of a similar case...