Syllabus

• A Preliminary Qualm

• Anthony D'Amato, Is International Law Really "Law"?, 79 Nw. U. L. Rev. 1293 (1985)

I. Where does International Law come from?

• a. I.C.J. (International Court of Justice) Statute Art. 38

• b. Discussion of Natural and Positive Law

• Introduction to Modern Reports, Kings Bench 1700

• c. Treaties

• Case Concerning U. S. Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran (U.S.A. v. Iran), International Court of Justice, 74 Am. J. Int'l L. 746

• d. Custom

• 1. J. S. Watson, Legal Theory, Efficacy and Validity in the Development of Human Rights Norms in International Law, 1979 U. Ill. L. Forum 609

• 2. Anthony D'Amato, The Concept of Human Rights in International Law, 82 Colum. L. Rev. 1110 (1982)

• 3. The Paquete Habana, 175 U.S. 677 (1900).

• e. General Principles

II. Using International Law at the International Level.

• a. Interpretation and Application of the 1971 Montreal Convention (Libya v. U.S.A.), International Court of Justice, 31 I.L.M. 665 (1992)

• b. Case Concerning Arbitral Award of 31 July 1989 (Guinea-Bissau v. Senegal), 31 I.L.M. 36 (ICJ, 1991)

• c. Research Note

• d. U.S.S. Stark, 26 I.L.M. 1423-28 (1987); 28 I.L.M. 645-48 (1989)

• e. International claims law.

• 1. Actions toward aliens that violate international law.

• a. Chattin (U.S.A.) v. United Mexican States, 4 U.N. Repts. of Intl. Arb. Awards 282 (Mexico/U.S.A. General Claims Commission).

• b. Richards (U.S.A.) v. United Mexican States, 4 U.N.Repts. of Intl. Arb. Awards 275 (Mexico/U.S.A. General Claims Commission, 1927).

• c. Lynching of Italians at New Orleans, 6 Moore, Digest of International Law 837 (1906).

• d. United States position on international expropriation. 1978 Digest of United States Practice in International Law1226-27.

• e. United States position on contract claims. 8 Whiteman,Digest of International Law 906 (1963) and 1975 Digest of United States Practice in International Law 485

• 2. Theory of claims in respect of nationals.

• a. United States position on espousal and settlement of claims. 8 Whiteman, Digest of International Law 1216 (1963).

• b. Excerpt from Dames & Moore v. Regan, 453 U.S. 654, 679-81 (1981).

• c. United States position on exhaustion of local remedies. 8 Whiteman, Digest of International Law 769-71 (1963).

• d. Ambatielos arbitration. 8 Whiteman, Digest of International Law 801-804.

• e. Nationality requirement, United States position. 8 Whiteman, Digest of International Law 1233 & 1243; 1978 Digest of United States Practice in International Law 1207-1208.

• f. Nottebohm Case (Liechtenstein v. Guatemala), [1955] I.C.J. Rep. 4 (International Court of Justice).

• f. A Brief Introduction to the Law of Treaties.

• 1. General discussion and relation of treaties to custom.

• 2. Problem.

• 3. Reservations.

• 4. Reservations to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, [1951] I.C.J. 15 (Advisory Opinion).

• 5. Interpretation.

• 6. Invalidity and termination.

III. USING INTERNATIONAL LAW AS A RULE OF DECISION IN UNITED STATES COURTS

• a. International Law as a canon of construction.

• United States v. Palestine Liberation Organization, 695 F.Supp. 1456 (S.D.N.Y. 1988)

• b. International Law as a Part of Common Law.

• 1. New Jersey v. Delaware, 291 U.S. 352 (1934).

• 2. The Paquete Habana, 175 U.S. 677 (1900).

• c. Treaties as "law of the land" under the Constitution.

• 1. Asakura v. City of Seattle, 265 U.S. 332 (1924).

• 2. Sei Fujii v. California, 242 P.2d 617 (Calif. 1952).

• 3. Diggs v. Shultz, 470 F.2d 461 (D.C. Cir 1972)

• d. Incorporation of International Law by Statutory Reference.

• United States v. California, 381 U.S. 139 (1965).

IV. Specific Contexts in Which International Law May Apply in United States Courts.

• a. The United States as plaintiff (criminal cases).

• 1. United States v. Columba-Colella, 604 F.2d 356 (5th Cir. 1979).

• 2. Demjanjuk v. Petrovsky, 776 F.2d 571 (6th Cir. 1985)

• 3. United States v. Alvarez-Machain, 504 U.S. 655 (1992).

• 4. United States v. Postal, 589 F.2d 862 (5th Cir. 1979).

• 5. Prosecuting Terrorists: When Does Apprehension in Violation of International Law Preclude Trial?, 42 Miami L. Rev. 447, 462-65 (1987).

• b. The United States as defendant (immigration law; challenges to foreign policy).

• 1. Rodriguez-Fernandez v. Wilkinson, 654 F.2d 1382 (10th Cir. 1981).

• 2. Jean v. Nelson, 727 F.2d 957 (11th Cir. 1984).

• c. Foreign states as plaintiffs (suits by foreign states in U.S. courts).

• 1. FRG v. Elicofon, 358 F.Supp. 747 (S.D. N.Y.), affirmed, 478 F.2d 231 (2d Cir. 1973), cert denied, 415 U.S. 931 (1974).

• 2. FRG v. Elicofon, 14 I.L.M. 806 (E.D.N.Y. 1974).

• 3. Guaranty Trust Co. v. United States, 304 U.S. 126 (1938).

• d. Foreign states as defendants (suits against foreign states in U.S. courts).

• 1. Letelier v. Republic of Chile, 488 F.Supp. 665 (D.D.C. 1980).

• 2. Republic of Argentina v. Weltover, 504 U.S. 607 (1992).

• 3. Saudi Arabia v. Nelson, 113 S.Ct. 1471 (1993).

• 4. Letelier v. Republic of Chile, 748 F.2d 790 (2d Cir. 1984).

• e. States of the Union as Parties.

• Nevada v. Hall, 440 U.S. 410 (1979).

• f. Private suits (making service and obtaining evidence abroad).

• Societe Nationale Industrielle Aerospatiale v. U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, 482 U.S. 522 (1987).

V. Foreign Affairs Law of the United States.

• a. Treaties and Federalism.

• 1. Missouri v. Holland, 252 U.S. 416 (1920).

• 2. Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957).

• b. Treaties, Executive Agreements, and the Separation of Powers.

• 1. United States v. Pink, 315 U.S. 203 (1942).

• 2. United States v. Guy W. Capps, Inc., 204 F.2d 655 (4th Cir. 1953).

• 3. Goldwater v. Carter, 617 F.2d 697 (D.C. Cir. 1979).

• 4. Edwards v. Carter, 580 F.2d 1055 (D.C. Cir. 1978).

• 5. Dames & Moore v. Regan, 453 U.S. 654 (1981).

• c. The Act of State Doctrine.

• 1. Banco Nacional de Cuba v. Sabbatino, 376 U.S. 398 (1964).

• 2. The Hickenlooper Amendments.

• 3. First National City Bank v. Banco Nacional de Cuba, 406 U.S. 759 (1972).

• 4. Alfred Dunhill of London, Inc. v. Cuba, 425 U.S. 682 (1976).

• 5. Kalamazoo Spice Extraction Co. v. Ethiopia, 729 F.2d 422 (6th Cir. 1984).

• 6. W.S. Kirkpatrick & Co. v. Environmental Tectonics Corp., 493 U.S. 400 (1990)

• d. Comity

• 1. Hilton v. Guyot, 159 U.S. 113 (1894)

• 2. Allied Bank International v. Banco Credito Agricola De Cartago, 733 F.2d (advance sheet) 23, 10 Md. J. Int'l L. & Trade 48 (2d Cir. Apr. 23, 1984), vacated on rehearing, 757 F.2d 516 (1984), cert. dismissed, 473 U.S. 934 (1985).

Return to International Law Class

Return to Homepage for John M. Rogers