Law Commons^™

The Political Branches And The Law Of Nations, Bradford R. Clark, Anthony J. Bellia

Journal Articles

In the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, the U.S. Supreme Court went out of its way to follow background rules of the law of nations, particularly the law of state-state relations. As we have recently argued, the Court followed the law of nations because adherence to such law preserved the constitutional prerogatives of the political branches to conduct foreign relations and decide momentous questions of war and peace. Although we focused primarily on the extent to which the Constitution obligated courts to follow the law of nations in the early republic, the explanation we offered rested on an important, …

The Post-Medellin Case For Legislative Standing, James A. Turner

Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

After the terrorist attacks against the United States on September 11, 2001, the balance of power between the executive and legislative branches of government in this country shifted. President Bush expanded the executive’s unilateral authority in international affairs and war powers. Both President Bush and President Obama have extended executive power, and then staunchly protected their expansion of authority from limitation by the legislative and judicial branches. Further, Bush’s use of presidential signing statements to undermine legislative intent suggests that the executive’s power to avoid legislative input may be virtually limitless.

The Supreme Court’s 2008 Medellín v. Texas decision appeared …