Abstract
While scholars have begun to debate the meaning of the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Medellin v. Texas for the domestic status of treaties, the decision’s import for other significant questions of foreign relations law has been ignored in the literature. This Article fills that void by exploring Medellin’s significance (a) for treaty and customary international law (CIL) based claims under the Alien Tort Statute, (b) for the hotly debated issue of CIL’s domestic legal status, and (c) for the recent claim that a uniform doctrine governing the domestic status of both treaties and CIL is developing in U.S. foreign relations law.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.