International Law and the U.S. Common Law of Foreign Official Immunity

Bradley and Helfer set forth a case for customary international law's (CIL) post-Samantar v Yousuf common law of immunity that is not dependent on a single theoretical perspective regarding the domestic status of CIL. They present a relatively dispassionate assessment of the evolving CIL landsc...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The Supreme Court review 2011-01, Vol.2010 (1), p.213-273
Main Authors: Bradley, Curtis A., Helfer, Laurence R.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Common law
Federal legislation
Governmental immunity
Human rights
Immunity
International law
Legal studies
Legislative immunity
Peremptory norm
Privileges & immunities
Sovereign states
Statutory law
Supreme Court decisions
Torture
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Bradley and Helfer set forth a case for customary international law's (CIL) post-Samantar v Yousuf common law of immunity that is not dependent on a single theoretical perspective regarding the domestic status of CIL. They present a relatively dispassionate assessment of the evolving CIL landscape, an assessment that is aided by the fact that they have somewhat differing perspectives about the proper role of international law in general and in human rights litigation in US courts in particular. They emphasize institutional considerations to isolate particular variables--such as the views of the Executive Branch and the policies embodied in domestic statutes--that will shape how CIL affects the common law of immunity after Samantar.
ISSN:0081-9557
2158-2459
DOI:10.1086/659836