Law Commons^™

Executive Agreements Relying On Implied Statutory Authority: A Response To Bodansky And Spiro, David A. Wirth

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

Until recently, the law surrounding executive agreements has been a subject of attention from a relatively small number of academics concerned with foreign relations law, along with State Department lawyers who have a need to deploy the underlying concepts in concrete determinations. Then, with little advance warning, the Paris Agreement thrust legal doctrines surrounding executive agreements to center stage in public policy debates and in the popular press. President Donald Trump's campaign promise to "cancel" the Paris Agreement has drawn even more attention to the issue. Unfortunately, the result has been a great deal of confusion, often needlessly contributing to …

"Head-Of-State-Owned Enterprise" Immunity, Pammela S. Quinn

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

While other wealthy individuals and businessmen have served and do serve as heads of state, the Trump presidency appears to be unique in terms of the global scope of the President's business interests, his propensity to be sued, and his disinterest in disentangling his business interests from his official agenda. This Article conceptualizes Trump's many business holdings and licenses under the Trump Organization International umbrella as a "head-of-state-owned enterprise." This raises issues similar to cases involving both head-of-state and state-owned enterprise immunity. Considering existing immunity doctrines, including gaps and contested areas in the law pertaining to them, the Article identifies …

Judicial Review Of Constitutional Transitions: War And Peace And Other Sundry Matters, Rivka Weill

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

Constitutional transition periods present a twilight time between two executives. At such times, the outgoing executive's authority is questionable because of the democratic difficulties and agency concerns that arise at the end of the executive's term. Thus, parliamentary systems developed constitutional conventions that restrict caretaker governments' action. These conventions seem to achieve the desired results in the United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia. In contrast, in the United States, the prevailing norm is that there is only one president at a time, and this is the incumbent president, who is fully authorized to govern the country and his or …

Foreign Official Immunity After Samantar: A United States Government Perspective, Harold H. Koh

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

I am delighted to speak here at Vanderbilt regarding the U.S. Government's perspective on Foreign Official Immunity after Samantar v. Yousuf.' In the Samantar case, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that the immunity of foreign government officials sued in their personal capacity in U.S. courts, including for alleged human rights violations, is not controlled by the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976, but rather, by immunity determinations made by the Executive Branch. Let me break my topic today into three parts: first, the world of foreign official immunity as it existed before the Samantar case; second, the Supreme Court's …

Head Of State Immunity As Sole Executive Lawmaking, Lewis S. Yelin

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

At the request of the Executive Branch, courts routinely dismiss private suits against sitting heads of foreign states. Congress has never delegated authority to the Executive Branch to identify principles governing head of state immunity. The courts' practice thus appears inconsistent with the conventional view that the Executive Branch lacks authority to affect private rights unless authorized by Congress to do so. This Article argues that the Executive Branch's practice of determining head of state immunity is an example of sole executive lawmaking, deriving from the President's constitutional responsibility as the only authorized representative of the United States in its …

A Paper Tiger With Bite: A Defense Of The War Powers Resolution, Michael B. Weiner

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

The War Powers Resolution (WPR) has led a beleaguered existence. Since its enactment in 1973, it has been labeled ineffectual and useless. This Note proves, however, that to review presidential unilateral uses of force since 1973 is to find a spirit of compliance with the WPR, as these uses of force have been characterized by their brevity and their lack of spilled U.S.blood. While minor departures from the WPR's black-letter requirements are conceded, none of these uses of force have developed into, or even resembled, Vietnam-esque quagmires. As a result, this Note contends that the WPR has had a positive …

The Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty Debate: Time For Some Clarification Of The President's Authority To Terminate A Treaty, Joshua P. O'Donnell

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

This Note explores the legal issues surrounding a president's legal authority to unilaterally withdraw from a treaty. This Note argues that, while international legal issues surrounding treaty termination are not controversial, the domestic legal issues surrounding the president's authority to terminate a treaty are heavily disputed. An analysis of these domestic legal issues does not resolve the controversy. Instead, this Note argues that a functional analysis is required. This functional analysis reveals that the president should have the power to unilaterally terminate a treaty because it maintains foreign policy effectiveness. The Note then argues that the Senate, which informally recognizes …

Recent Decisions, Daniel M. Fitzpatrick, William F. Buechler

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

Executive Power--President Has the Power to Block and Transfer Iranian Assets, Nullify Prejudgment Attachments, and Suspend Claims of United States Nationals in Implementing Executive Agreement for Release of Hostages

Petitioner sued the United States and the Secretary of the Treasury to enjoin enforcement of Treasury Department regulations and executive orders implementing an executive agreement with Iran that would nullify petitioner's prejudgment attachment of Iranian bank assets and prevent further litigation of its claim against Iran. The events leading up to this suit are relevant to a discussion of the legal issues.

Presidential Emergency Powers Related To International Economic Transactions, Mary M.C. Bowman

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

On December 28, 1977, President Carter signed into law Public Law 95-223, an act "[w]ith respect to the powers of the President in time of war or national emergency." The primary purpose of the Act is to revise the Trading With the Enemy Act of 1917 (TWEA), and thus to restrict presidential authority to respond to emergencies related to international economic transactions. The Act is the latest product of a continuing congressional effort to readjust the balance of power between the two branches of government. The War Powers Resolution and the National Emergencies Act were earlier pieces of legislation intended …

The Import Surcharge Of 1971: A Case Study Of Executive Power In Foreign Commerce, David Pollard, David A. Boillot

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

The importance of foreign trade in the conduct of foreign affairs demonstrates that many foreign commerce questions contain foreign affairs overtones. For example, President Nixon has recently noted that congressional restrictions on granting the Soviet Union most-favored-nation treatment would be "a hurdle to further detente." Although article I, section 8 of the Constitution vests the power to regulate foreign commerce in the legislative branch, the Congress has delegated a great deal of that power to the Executive. Moreover, it appears that the President possesses certain inherent powers in foreign commerce as a result of his extensive, albeit undefined, authority in …

The Nature And Extent Of Executive Power To Espouse The International Claims Of United States Nationals, Jesse W. Hill, Steven M. Lucas

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

International law is generally considered to be law that governs the conduct of sovereign states only. While individual private persons, both natural and juridical, undoubtedly are third-party beneficiaries of the rights and duties created by international law, those rights and duties, in the classical analysis, run only among sovereigns. Because rules of international law and treaties constitute obligations among or between sovereign states, a violation of international law imposes international responsibility not to the private parties who are injured by the violation but to the sovereign states of which they are members. Private parties, therefore, generally have no standing to …