POLITICAL ASPECTS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW IN NATIONAL LEGISLATION OF THE UNITED STATES: FROM THEORY TO PRACTICE

Cover Page

Abstract


One of the big-league participants in major international processes, the US government defines the current agenda of the modern world order, steers the vector of international relations development and affects the distribution of power on the global political arena. A supporter of the Non-Institutionalized Global Governance concept and the idea of Rule of Law, American administration demonstrates its own, specific understanding of the goals and course of action of modern international legislation. It seems to have its own insight on the nature and order of international organizations in regards to formulation and adoption of international law, the US role in determining the key features of global law enforcement, as well as the standards and principles of implementation of international law in the US federal legislation. Despite the recent tendency of the US government to roll back from participation in IO projects and revision of a number of agreements within the framework of interstate cooperation, the United States not only succeeds, one way or another, in guiding the trends of global political development, but also continues to have an impact on the interpretation and application of international law. The given article looks at the status of international law in the American legal system, focuses on the participation of the United States in proposition, discussion and adoption of conventions, declarations, agreements and other documents within the framework of the UN, and determines the main directions, according to which American jurisdiction implements international legal doctrines. The current research also brings a focus on specific issues, problems, relations, and contacts regulated at the international level but not implemented by the US federal legislation. The article analyzes political aspects of formulation and adoption of legal rules by American public administration, which are meant to supplement and specify the dominant principles of international sources of law.


About the authors

Mikhail A Burda

Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration

Author for correspondence.
Email: burdamix@mail.ru
Moscow, Russian Federation

PhD in Political Science, Associate Professor of the Department of Political Science and Political Management, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration

Ekaterina S Shevchenko

Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration

Email: katerina.shevv@yandex.ru
Moscow, Russian Federation

Master Student of the Department of Political Science and Political Management, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration

References

  1. Haley: Declaration on the Reform of the UN Was Signed by 128 Countries. TASS. 18.09.2018. Available from: https://tass.ru/mezhdunarodnaya-panorama/4571441. Accessed: 04.09.2018 (In Russ.).
  2. Dodge W.S. Jurisdiction in The Fourth Restatement of Foreign Relations Law. 18 Yearbook of Private International Law 143 (2017). UC Davis Legal Studies Research Paper. May 2017: 143—170.
  3. Dodge W.S. Brief of Professors of International Litigation as Amici Curiae in Support of Neither Party, In Animal Science Products, Inc. v. Hebei Welcome Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd. In the Supreme Court of The United States. March 2018. 34 p.
  4. Dodge W.S. International Comity in American Law. 115 Columbia Law Review 2071. UC Davis Legal Studies Research Paper No. 470. February 2015: 2071—2142.
  5. Donald Trump’s War on The Alphabet of International Order. CNN. July 2018. Available from: https://edition.cnn.com/2018/07/06/politics/donald-trump-international-foreign-policy-upsetallies-enemies/index.html. Accessed: 02.09.2018.
  6. Elbalti B. Reciprocity and The Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments: A Lot of Bark but not Much Bite. Journal of Private International Law. 2017; 13(1): 184—218.
  7. First Committee: 72nd session, Plenary Meeting. General Assembly of The United Nations. Available from: http://www.un.org/en/ga/first/72/pdf/voting-records-72.pdf. Accessed: 18.09.2018.
  8. Garcia M.J. International Law and Agreements: Their Effect Upon U.S. Law. Congressional Research Service. February 2015. 28 p.
  9. How Local Housing Regulations Smother the U.S. Economy. The New York Times. September 2017. Available from: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/06/opinion/housing-regulations-useconomy.html. Accessed: 02.09.2018.
  10. New York’s Highest Court Endorses Application of “Separate Entity Rule” to International Banks: Landmark Ruling by Court of Appeals Confirms that Service of Asset Freeze Order on New York Branch of International Bank Does Not Reach Overseas Branches. Sullivan&Cromvell LLP. October 2014. Available from: https://www.sullcrom.com/new-yorkshighest-court-endorses-application-of-separate-entity-rule-to-international-banks. Accessed: 20.09.2018.
  11. Peake J.S. The Decline of Treaties? Obama, Trump, and the Politics of International Agreements. Paper Presented at the Annual Meetings of the Midwest Political Science Association. Chicago, April 5—7, 2018. April 2018. 44 p.
  12. Resolutions. General Assembly of The United Nations. December 2017. Available from: http://undocs.org/en/A/RES/72/113. Accessed: 14.09.2018.
  13. Resolutions. General Assembly of The United Nations. December 2017. Available from: http://undocs.org/en/A/RES/72/114. Accessed: 14.09.2018.
  14. Resolutions. General Assembly of The United Nations. December 2016. Available from: http://undocs.org/en/A/RES/71/135. Accessed: 16.09.2018.
  15. Resolutions. General Assembly of The United Nations. December 2016. Available from: http://undocs.org/en/A/RES/71/136. Accessed: 16.09.2018.
  16. Resolutions. General Assembly of The United Nations. December 2016. Available from: http://undocs.org/en/A/RES/71/137. Accessed: 16.09.2018.
  17. Resolutions. General Assembly of The United Nations. December 2016. Available from: http://undocs.org/en/A/RES/71/138. Accessed: 16.09.2018.
  18. Status of Action on Draft Proposals (as of 02 November 2017). General Assembly of The United Nations. Available from: http://www.un.org/en/ga/first/72/pdf/draftproposals-status.pdf. Accessed: 18.09.2018.
  19. The Court Announces the Following Decisions. Supreme Court. November 2013. Available from: http://www.nycourts.gov/courts/ad1/calendar/appsmots/2013/November/2013_11_14_dec.pdf. Accessed: 04.09.2018.
  20. The United States Constitution. The United States National Archives and Records Administration. Available from: https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution. Accessed: 04.09.2018.
  21. Tsetsura K., Aziz K. Toward Professional Standards for Media Transparency in The United States: Comparison of Perceptions of Non-Transparency in National vs. Regional Media. Public Relations Review. March 2018; Vol. 44; 1: 180—190.
  22. U.S. Was Winning War Against China’s Intellectual Property Theft. Then Trump Took Office. Bloomberg. April 2018. Available from: https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-0410/trump-ensures-china-s-intellectual-property-theft-won-t-be-solved. Accessed: 02.09.2018.
  23. United States Code. The United States Congress. Available from: http://uscode.house.gov/. Accessed: 04.09.2018.
  24. Yukins C.R. The Trump Administration’s Policy Options in International Procurement. 2016 West Gov. Contracts Year in Rev. Sess. 2-I (Feb. 2017). GWU Law School Public Law Research Paper No. 2017-8. GWU Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2017-8. March 2017. 9 p.

Statistics

Views

Abstract - 414

PDF (Russian) - 256

Cited-By


PlumX

Dimensions


Copyright (c) 2019 Burda M.A., Shevchenko E.S.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies