Special Announcement: Letter to Our Readers Regarding the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election
For the past fifty-five years, the Columbia Journal of Transnational Law has sought to provide the practicing bar and the academic community with insight into the evolving challenges of an increasingly interdependent world. This undertaking is grounded in the belief that relationships between countries, organizations, and citizens should be ordered by rules that foster trust and stability among global actors. Our mission is perhaps most essential in times of heightened uncertainty regarding the foundations of the international system.
On November 8, 2016, Donald Trump was elected to serve as the forty-fifth president of the United States. A U.S. election always has important international ramifications, but in this case, the consequences loom larger given that the winning candidate has advocated a dramatic reorientation of U.S. foreign policy. President-elect Trump’s campaign repeatedly challenged long-held assumptions about the role of the United States in the international legal order, including the terms of U.S. participation in free trade and cooperative security agreements, observance of jus cogens norms, and involvement in a range of foreign conflicts and humanitarian initiatives.
Compounding the potential effects of this election is a wave of similar sentiments across the globe, evidenced by instances such as the United Kingdom’s decision to leave the European Union, the rising tide of nationalist and protectionist parties across Europe, and the Philippines’ authoritarian and populist clampdown in the drug war. These seemingly disparate events indicate a widespread, growing distrust of the international structure, international law, and the policies of the international community.
The Columbia Journal of Transnational Law is committed to remaining a space for open, multifaceted discourse. In that spirit, we are encouraging you, our readers, to reflect on the impact of recent events and share those reflections and ideas with one another. We welcome views from all political affiliations, nations, and perspectives. To facilitate this discourse, we will be devoting a special section of the Journal’s online companion, The Bulletin, to essays and commentary on the potential impact of the U.S. election and a Trump presidency, about which many questions of international legal significance remain. Submissions can be emailed to firstname.lastname@example.org.
The Executive Editorial Board, Columbia Journal of Transnational Law
Current Issue: Volume 54, Number 3
Digital Destruction: Applying the Principle of Non-Intervention to Distributed Denial of Service Attacks Manifesting No Physical DamageBy: William Mattessich
The principle of non-intervention provides one avenue for applying current international law to DDoS attacks that are not immediately physically destructive. Under the principle of non-intervention, such attacks would be internationally unlawful if they amounted to coercion of the target state.read more
The CFIUS process typically occurs privately and opaquely, but Ralls Corporation brought a legal challenge in federal courts resulting from an unfavorable ruling. Though full resolution did not ultimately occur, the first and only CFIUS suit in history opened the door for future litigation and substantially strengthened investors’ rights.read more
Corporate governance literature usually refers to enforcement superiority to explain the premium that foreign firms enjoy when cross-listing in U.S. stock exchanges. This Article casts doubt on this hypothesis by analyzing two comparative case studies of private and public enforcement actions taken against securities fraud in the United States and in Brazil. The case studies show that U.S. enforcement was superior in terms of private shareholder financial recovery but inferior when it came to public discipline and out-of-pocket liability costs for corporate actors.read more
This Article identifies an emerging regime complex in the field of international criminal law and analyzes the development of the regional criminal court to the African Court of Justice and Human Rights. This Article discusses how the International Criminal Court’s institutional crisis created a space for regional innovation. It finds that regime complexes can form not only due to strategic inconsistencies as discussed in the literature, but also because of the influence of regional integration.read more
International Dealmaking at the White House: Toward a Viable Test of Allowable Sole Executive AgreementsBy: Joshua Abbuhl
The Constitution’s Treaty Clause, which states that the President “shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur,” represents the only instance in which the Constitution describes a process by which the U.S. can conclude international agreements. This Note explores when the President may nevertheless lawfully enter “sole executive agreements” without the assent of a supermajority of the Senate.read more
The proposition of mining an asteroid for natural resources is quickly moving from the realm of science fiction into viable reality. Meanwhile, the legal status of an asteroid-mining venture remains doubtful. This Note gives the legal problems a firmer foundation in scientific experience, weighs the merits and shortcomings of the extant proposals, considers which empirical variables should shape any future legal approach to asteroid law, and addresses some of the more general challenges of making law prospectively.read more
The Commission on the Constitution at both chambers of Japanese parliament reopened the debates on the revision of the Article 9 of Japanese Constitution, known as the “peace clause.”read more
The South African executive branch recently announced its intent to withdraw from the International Criminal Court. An analysis of the South African Constitution may reveal limits to the executive’s argument that it has the authority to unilaterally withdraw from the Rome Statute.read more
On February 24, 2016, President Obama signed the “Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015” (FCFE Act) into law. Title III of the FCFE Act expands import-related protection of intellectual property rights in a way that has important implications.read more
An interview with Professor Petros Mavroidis provides insight into his experience with the World Trade Organization, thoughts on the politics of international trade, and advice for law students interested in working on trade issues.read more
A note from our Executive Editorial Board soliciting submissions for a special online section devoted to the U.S. election.read more