By re-writing US Supreme Court opinions that implicate critical dimensions of racial justice, Critical Race Judgments demonstrates that it's possible to be judge and a critical race theorist. Specific issues covered in these cases include the death penalty, employment, voting, policing, education, the environment, justice, housing, immigration, sexual orientation, segregation, and mass incarceration. While some rewritten cases - Plessy v. Ferguson (which constitutionalized Jim Crow) and Korematsu v. United States (which constitutionalized internment) - originally focused on race, many of the rewritten opinions - Lawrence v. Texas (which constitutionalized sodomy laws) and Roe v. Wade (which constitutionalized a woman's right to choose) - are used to incorporate racial justice principles in novel and important ways. This work is essential for everyone who needs to understand why critical race theory must be deployed in constitutional law to uphold and advance racial justice principles that are foundational to US democracy.

By re-writing US Supreme Court opinions that implicate critical dimensions of racial justice, Critical Race Judgments demonstrates that it's possible to be judge and a critical race theorist. Specific issues covered in these cases include the death penalty, employment, voting, policing, education, the environment, justice, housing, immigration, sexual orientation, segregation, and mass incarceration. While some rewritten cases - Plessy v. Ferguson (which constitutionalized Jim Crow) and Korematsu v. United States (which constitutionalized internment) - originally focused on race, many of the rewritten opinions - Lawrence v. Texas (which constitutionalized sodomy laws) and Roe v. Wade (which constitutionalized a woman's right to choose) - are used to incorporate racial justice principles in novel and important ways. This work is essential for everyone who needs to understand why critical race theory must be deployed in constitutional law to uphold and advance racial justice principles that are foundational to US democracy.

The ALI (American Law Institute) and UNIDROIT (the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law) are preeminent organizations working together toward the clarification and advancement of the procedural rules of law. Recognizing the need for a universal set of procedures that would transcend national jurisdictional rules and facilitate the resolution of disputes arising from transnational commercial transactions, Principles of Transnational Civil Procedure was launched to create a set of procedural rules and principles that would be adopted globally. This work strives to reduce uncertainty for parties that must litigate in unfamiliar surroundings and to promote fairness in judicial proceedings. As recognized standards of civil justice, Principles of Transnational Civil Procedure can be used in judicial proceedings as well as in arbitration. The result is a work that significantly contributes to the promotion of a universal rule of procedural law.
The American Law Institute was organized in 1923 following a study conducted by a group of prominent American judges, lawyers, and law professors. Their recommendation that a lawyers' organization be formed to improve the law and its administration led to the creation of The American Law Institute.
UNIDROIT was founded in 1926 as a specialized agency of the League of Nations. It exists as an independent intergovernmental organization on the basis of a multilateral agreement, the UNIDROIT Statute. Its purpose is to study needs and methods for modernizing, harmonizing, and coordinating private laws between states and groups of states and to prepare legislative texts for consideration by governments.

While resistance to international courts is not new, what is new, or at least newly conceptualized, is the politics of backlash against these institutions. Saving the International Justice Regime: Beyond Backlash against International Courts is at the forefront of this new conceptualization of backlash politics. It brings together theories, concepts and methods from the fields of international law, international relations, human rights and political science and case studies from around the globe to pose - and answer - three questions related to backlash against international courts: What is backlash and what forms does it take? Why do states and elites engage in backlash against international human rights and criminal courts? What can stakeholders and supporters of international justice do to meet these contemporary challenges?

Accounts of international criminal courts have tended to consist of reflections on abstract legal texts, on judgements and trial transcripts. Genocide Never Sleeps, based on ethnographic research at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), provides an alternative account, describing a messy, flawed human process in which legal practitioners faced with novel challenges sought to reconfigure long-standing habits and opinions while maintaining a commitment to 'justice'. From the challenges of simultaneous translation to collaborating with colleagues from different legal traditions, legal practitioners were forced to scrutinise that which normally remains assumed in domestic law. By providing an account of this process, Genocide Never Sleeps not only provides a unique insight into the exceptional nature of the ad hoc, improvised ICTR and the day-to-day practice of international criminal justice, but also holds up for fresh inspection much that is naturalised and assumed in unexceptional, domestic legal processes.

International courts and tribunals differ in their institutional composition and functions, but a shared characteristic is their reliance on the contribution of individuals other than the judicial decision-makers themselves. Such 'unseen actors' may take the form of registrars and legal officers, but also non-lawyers such as translators and scientific experts. Unseen actors are vital to the functioning of international adjudication, exerting varying levels of influence on judicial processes and outcomes. The opaqueness of their roles, combined with the significance of judicial decisions for the parties involved as well as a wider range of stakeholders, raises questions about unseen actors' impact on the legitimacy of international dispute settlement. This book aims to answer such legitimacy questions and identify 'best practices' through a multifaceted enquiry into common connections and patterns in the institutional composition and daily practice of international courts and tribunals.

Understanding exactly how the International Court of Justice applies the remedies of international law is vital in order to determine its prioritisation of remedies and its rationales for resolving inter-state disputes. This analysis also shows whether the framework of remedies of international law, designed by the International Law Commission through the Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, is strictly observed by the International Court of Justice. This is among the few systemic studies in the field of remedies, contrasting the theoretical controversies with a complete survey of the large set of requests that have been submitted before the ICJ. International lawyers, agents of states and diplomats will be able to identify the relevant case-law for each remedy in order to frame more effective requests to the Court. This study will also be of interest to researchers, practitioners, judges, policymakers, and graduate students.

This book explores how the Permanent Court of International Justice, the International Court of Justice, the European Court of Human Rights, and investment treaty tribunals have used deference to recognise the decision making authority of States. It analyses the approaches to deference taken by these four international courts and tribunals in 1,714 decisions produced between 1924 and 2019 concerning alleged State interferences with private property. The book identifies a large number of techniques capable of achieving deference to domestic decision-making in international adjudication. It groups these techniques to identify seven distinct 'modes' of deference reflecting differently structured relationships between international adjudicators and domestic decision-makers. These differing approaches to deference are shown to hold systemic significance. They reveal the shifting nature and structure of adjudication under international law and its relationship to domestic decision making authority.

The Crisis behind the Euro-Crisis encourages dialogue among scholars across the social sciences in an attempt to challenge the narrative that regarded the Euro-crisis as an exceptional event. It is suggested instead that the Euro-crisis, along with the subsequent crises the EU has come to face, was merely symptomatic of deeper systemic cracks. This book's aim is to uncover that hidden systemic crisis - the 'crisis behind the Euro-crisis'. Under this reading it emerges that what needs to be questioned is not only the allegedly purely economic character of the Euro-crisis, but, more fundamentally, its very classification as an 'emergency'. Instead, the Euro-crisis needs to be regarded as expressive of a chronic, dysfunctional, but 'normal' condition of the EU. By following this line of analysis, this book illuminates not only the causes of contemporary turbulences in the European project, but perhaps the 'true' nature of the EU itself.

Great Judgments of the European Court of Justice presents a new approach to understanding the landmark decisions of the European Court of Justice in the 1960s and 1970s. By comparing the Court's doctrines to the enforcement and escape mechanisms employed by more common forms of trade treaty, it demonstrates how the individual rights created by the doctrine of direct effect were connected to the practical challenges of trade politics among the European states and, in particular, to the suppression of unilateral safeguard mechanisms and inter-state retaliation. Drawing on the writings and speeches of French Judge and President of the Court, Robert Lecourt, it demonstrates that one of the Court's most influential judges shared this understanding of the logic of direct effect. This book offers a distinctive interpretation of the Court of Justice's early years, as well as of the purpose of the fundamental principles of European law.

This is the first in-depth study of the first three ICC trials: an engaging, accessible text meant for specialists and students, for legal advocates and a wide range of professionals concerned with diverse cultures, human rights, and restorative justice. It introduces international justice and courtroom trials in practical terms, offering a balanced view on persistent tensions and controversies. Separate chapters analyze the working realities of central African armed conflicts, finding reasons for their surprising resistance to ICC legal formulas. The book dissects the Court's structural dynamics, which were designed to steer an elusive middle course between high moral ideals and hard political realities. Detailed chapters provide vivid accounts of courtroom encounters with four Congolese suspects. The mixed record of convictions, acquittals, dissents, and appeals, resulting from these trials, provides a map of distinct fault-lines within the ICC legal code, and suggests a rocky path ahead for the Court's next ventures.

There are many variables of territoriality available to national courts under contemporary international law. Does the same apply to the International Criminal Court? And if so, what are the limits to the teleological expansion of the Court's territorial jurisdiction as regards, for example, partial commission of a crime in State not Party territory, crimes committed over the internet or crimes committed in occupied territories? Michael Vagias's analysis of the law and procedure surrounding the territorial jurisdiction of the Court examines issues such as the application of localisation theories of territoriality and the means of interpretation for article 12(2)(a); the principle of legality (nullum crimen sine lege) and human rights law for the interpretation of jurisdictional provisions; competence de la competence; crimes committed over the internet; and the procedure for jurisdictional objections.

As a result of globalization, cross-border transactions and litigation, and multilingual legislation, outsourcing legal translation has become common practice. Unfortunately, over-reliance on such outsourcing has given rise to significant dangers, including information asymmetry, goal divergence, and risk. Legal Translation Outsourced provides the only current reference on commercial legal translation performed outside institutions. Juliette Scott casts a critical eye on the practice as it now stands, offering an analysis of key risks and constraints. Her work is informed by empirical data of the legal translation outsourcing markets of 41 countries. Scott proposes original theoretical models aimed both at training legal translators and informing all stakeholders, including principals and agents. These include models of legal translation performance; a classification of constraints on legal translation applying upstream, during and downstream of translation work; and a description of the complex chain of supply. Working to improve the enterprise itself, Scott shows how implementing a comprehensive legal translation brief-a sorely needed template-can significantly benefit clients by increasing the fitness of translated texts. Further, she opens a number of avenues for future research with an eye to translator empowerment and professionalization.

One of the most noted developments in international law over the past twenty years is the proliferation of international courts and tribunals. They decide who has the right to exploit natural resources, define the scope of human rights, delimit international boundaries and determine when the use of force is prohibited. As the number and influence of international courts grow, so too do challenges to their legitimacy. This volume provides new interdisciplinary insights into international courts' legitimacy: what drives and undermines the legitimacy of these bodies? How do drivers change depending on the court concerned? What is the link between legitimacy, democracy, effectiveness and justice? Top international experts analyse legitimacy for specific international courts, as well as the links between legitimacy and cross-cutting themes. Failure to understand and respond to legitimacy concerns can endanger both the courts and the law they interpret and apply.

International courts and tribunals now operate globally and in several world regions, playing significant roles in international law and global governance. However, these courts vary significantly in terms of their practices, procedures, and the outcomes they produce. Why do some international courts perform better than others? Which factors affect the outcome of these courts and tribunals? The Performance of International Courts and Tribunals is an interdisciplinary study featuring approaches, methods and authorship from law and political science, which proposes the concept of performance to describe the processes and outcomes of international courts. It develops a framework for evaluating and explaining performance by offering a broad comparative analysis of international courts, covering several world regions and the areas of trade, investment, the environment, human rights and criminal law, and offers interdisciplinary accounts to explain how and why international court performance varies.

The Hidden Hands of Justice: NGOs, Human Rights, and International Courts is the first comprehensive analysis of non-governmental organization (NGO) participation at international criminal and human rights courts. Drawing on original data, Heidi Nichols Haddad maps and explains the differences in NGO participatory roles, frequency, and impact at three judicial institutions: the European Court of Human Rights, the Inter-American Human Rights System, and the International Criminal Court. The Hidden Hands of Justice demonstrates that courts can strategically choose to enhance their functionality by allowing NGOs to provide needed information, expertise, and services as well as shame states for non-cooperation. Through participation, NGOs can profoundly shape the character of international human rights justice, but in doing so, may consolidate civil society representation and relinquish their roles as external monitors.

Criminal Law, Twelfth Edition, a classic introduction to criminal law for criminal justice students, combines the best features of a casebook and a textbook. Its success over numerous editions, both at community colleges as well as in four-year college criminal justice programs, is proof this text works as an authoritative source on criminal law, as well as a teaching text that communicates with students. The book covers substantive criminal law and explores its principles, sources, distinctions, and limitations. Definitions and elements of crimes are explained, and defenses to crimes are thoroughly analyzed. Each chapter offers guidance to help students understand what is important, including chapter outlines, key terms, learning objectives, Legal News boxes that highlight current criminal law issues, and Quick Checks that cue the reader to stop and answer a question or two concerning the material just covered. Unique Exploring Case Law boxes offer guidance in using the accompanying cases, which are provided on the book's website and in Part II of this textbook. A robust collection of instructor support materials addresses teaching and learning issues. Updated with all the newest relevant law, this book is appropriate for undergraduate students in criminal law and related courses.

In recent decades, international courts have increasingly started investigating armed conflicts. However, the impact of this remains under-researched. Patrick S. Wegner closes this gap via a comprehensive analysis of the impact of the International Criminal Court in the Darfur and Lord's Resistance Army conflicts. He offers a fresh approach to peace and conflict studies, while avoiding the current quantitative focus of the literature and polarisation between critics and supporters of applying justice in conflicts. This is the first time that the impact of an international criminal court has been analysed in all its facets in two conflicts. The consequences of these investigations are much more complex and difficult to predict than most of the existing literature suggests. Recurrent claims, such as the deterrent effect of trials and the danger of blocking negotiations by the issuing of arrest warrants, are put to the test here with some surprising results.

Between Fragmentation and Democracy explores the phenomenon of the fragmentation of international law and global governance following the proliferation of international institutions with overlapping jurisdictions and ambiguous boundaries. The authors argue that this problem has the potential to sabotage the evolution of a more democratic and egalitarian system and identify the structural reasons for the failure of global institutions to protect the interests of politically weaker constituencies. This book offers a comprehensive understanding of how new global sources of democratic deficits increasingly deprive individuals and collectives of the capacity to protect their interests and shape their opportunities. It also considers the role of the courts in mitigating the effects of globalization and the struggle to define and redefine institutions and entitlements. This book is an important resource for scholars of international law and international politics, as well as for public lawyers, political scientists, and those interested in judicial reform.

Failings of the International Court of Justice critically examines the jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice. Even though the legal instrument that establishes the Court provides that its judgments have no formal precedential value, those judgments are treated as authoritative by international lawyers throughout the world. In this book, A. Mark Weisburd argues that the Court's decisions are, in a large minority of cases, poorly reasoned and doubtful as a matter of law, and therefore ought not to be accorded the deference they receive. The book seeks to demonstrate its thesis by a careful review of the Court's errors. It begins with an examination of the law that created and empowered the Court. It then describes the body of law upon which the Court was intended to base its decisions, and the mistakes in the arguments supporting the Court's drawing legal rules from other sources. The book goes on to analyze in detail cases in which the Court has made serious legal errors, first addressing procedural errors, then turning to mistakes in the application of substantive international law. The book closes with a quantitative summing up of the Court's performance, and a tentative explanation for its relatively disappointing record.

Fact-Finding before the International Court of Justice examines a number of significant recent criticisms of the way in which the ICJ deals with facts. The book takes the position that such criticisms are warranted and that the ICJ's current approach to fact-finding falls short of adequacy, both in cases involving abundant, particularly complex or technical facts, and in those involving a scarcity of facts. The author skilfully examines how other courts such as the WTO and inter-State arbitrations conduct fact-finding and makes a number of select proposals for reform, enabling the ICJ to address some of the current weaknesses in its approach. The proposals include, but are not limited to, the development of a power to compel the disclosure of information, greater use of provisional measures, and a clear strategy for the use of expert evidence.

International courts and tribunals now operate globally and in several world regions, playing significant roles in international law and global governance. However, these courts vary significantly in terms of their practices, procedures, and the outcomes they produce. Why do some international courts perform better than others? Which factors affect the outcome of these courts and tribunals? The Performance of International Courts and Tribunals is an interdisciplinary study featuring approaches, methods and authorship from law and political science, which proposes the concept of performance to describe the processes and outcomes of international courts. It develops a framework for evaluating and explaining performance by offering a broad comparative analysis of international courts, covering several world regions and the areas of trade, investment, the environment, human rights and criminal law, and offers interdisciplinary accounts to explain how and why international court performance varies.

The Balkan Wars, the Rwanda genocide, and the crimes against humanity in Cambodia and Sierra Leone spurred the creation of international criminal tribunals to bring the perpetrators of unimaginable atrocities to justice. When Richard Goldstone, David Crane, Robert Petit, and Luis Moreno-Ocampo received the call - each set out on a unique quest to build an international criminal tribunal and launch its first prosecutions. Never before have the founding International Prosecutors told the behind-the-scenes stories of their historic journey. With no blueprint and little precedent, each was a path-breaker. This book contains the first-hand accounts of the challenges they faced, the obstacles they overcame, and the successes they achieved in obtaining justice for millions of victims.

Judicial independence, integrity and impartiality are crucial to public trust in the judiciary. Justice must also be seen to be dispensed fairly and without fear or favour. In the context of themes and perspectives as well as comparative theories of independence, this book provides a contemporary analysis of the role and independence of judges in fifteen countries in the Asia-Pacific. Expert analyses include countries that are governed by authoritarian governments or are beset by dramatic government changes, which undermine judges by attacking and preventing their independence, to more democratic countries where there are strides towards judicial independence. The problems confronting judges and courts are explained and analysed, with the aim of establishing a commonality of standards which can be developed to strengthen and promote the important values of judicial independence, impartiality and integrity. Solutions for the Asia-Pacific region are also proposed.

Between Fragmentation and Democracy explores the phenomenon of the fragmentation of international law and global governance following the proliferation of international institutions with overlapping jurisdictions and ambiguous boundaries. The authors argue that this problem has the potential to sabotage the evolution of a more democratic and egalitarian system and identify the structural reasons for the failure of global institutions to protect the interests of politically weaker constituencies. This book offers a comprehensive understanding of how new global sources of democratic deficits increasingly deprive individuals and collectives of the capacity to protect their interests and shape their opportunities. It also considers the role of the courts in mitigating the effects of globalization and the struggle to define and redefine institutions and entitlements. This book is an important resource for scholars of international law and international politics, as well as for public lawyers, political scientists, and those interested in judicial reform.