As U.S. law enforcement agencies have intensified their efforts to combat bribery in international business under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), one form of corruption has been overlooked: bribery of indigenous leaders by multinational enterprises undertaking projects that will impact their communities. This Article demonstrates that the FCPA, the Travel Act, and other federal statutes could be readily applied to this form of bribery.
This article argues that reading should be understood as a universal human right. Once recognized in principle, it remains necessary to translate the right to read from a vague ideal into concrete content. As a starting point, the right to read requires that every person be entitled to education for literacy and the liberty to freely choose the reading material they prefer. Less obviously, but crucially, the right to read also means that everyone must have access to an adequate supply of reading material. Law and policy must be designed to ensure that books, ebooks, and other reading material are made widely available and affordable—even to the poor and to speakers of minority languages.
Every court has its Marbury moment. To support this argument, this Article reviews seminal cases from three types of courts: U.S. federal, regional, and international. This Article concludes that Marbury moments provide novel insights about both Marbury v. Madison itself and the nature of domestic and international courts.
Incidents by suspected Russian submarines spying in Swedish and Finnish waters in 2014 and 2015, and the ample history of such incidents over the past sixty-five years involving Chinese, British, North Korean, American, and Soviet (and Russian) submarines, suggest undersea spying occurs with some regularity, yet the political and legal consequences are uncertain. While submarine intrusions into the territorial sea are not uncommon, the legal standards that govern such operations and the rights and duties of affected coastal states are murky.
Convicting with Our Eyes Open: Regulation of Eyewitness Identification in the United States and England and WalesBy: Marco Y. Wong
This Note considers whether the U.S. Supreme Court’s current standard for regulating eyewitness identification evidence is satisfactory. Many years of research have shown that this type of evidence can be dangerous to our criminal justice system by contributing to mistaken convictions. Yet, because eyewitness evidence can be probative and is readily available, we tolerate its continued use so long as safeguards are in place to minimize risk of error.
Forcing Europe to Wear the Rose-Colored Google Glass: The “Right to Be Forgotten” and the Struggle to Manage Compliance Post Google SpainBy: Steven M. LoCascio
The Court of Justice of the European Union’s ruling in the 2014 Google Spain case has strengthened the “Right to Be Forgotten” considerably, as European citizens can now demand that search engines delete links to embarrassing information about them. This Note compares this process to the procedural safeguards found in defamation and privacy law in Western democracies, and argues that these safeguards are largely absent from the Google Spain review process.
This essay reviews Jens David Ohlin’s The Assault on International Law, an important new book that analyzes the arguments deployed by the New Realists in their efforts to detach the United States—and the Executive Branch, in particular—from certain international obligations. The essay finds compelling the book’s core argument: that the New Realists misconstrued and misapplied game theory.