Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Formalism And Distrust: Foreign Affairs Law In The Roberts Court,, Harlan G. Cohen
Formalism And Distrust: Foreign Affairs Law In The Roberts Court,, Harlan G. Cohen
Scholarly Works
When it comes to foreign relations, the Roberts Court has trust issues. As far as the Court is concerned, everyone — the President, Congress, the lower courts, plaintiffs — has played hard and fast with the rules, taking advantage of the Court’s functionalist approaches to foreign affairs issues. This seems to be the message of the Roberts Court foreign affairs law jurisprudence. The Roberts Court has been active in foreign affairs law, deciding cases on the detention and trial of enemy combatants, foreign sovereign immunity, the domestic effect of treaties, the extraterritorial reach of federal statutes, the preemption of state …
The Death Of Deference And The Domestication Of Treaty Law, Harlan G. Cohen
The Death Of Deference And The Domestication Of Treaty Law, Harlan G. Cohen
Scholarly Works
How much deference do courts give to Executive branch views on treaty interpretation? The Restatement (Third) of the Foreign Relations Law of the United States tells us that courts “will give great weight to an interpretation made by the executive branch,” and earlier empirical studies suggested that deference to Executive in such cases was robust. But is that still the case? The Supreme Court’s rejection of the Executive’s view in a series of high profile cases including Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, BG Group PLC v. Republic of Argentina, and Bond v. United States should raise some doubts. This short article investigates, …