Emory International Law Review

Volume 27Issue 2
Recent Developments

Landlubbers as Pirates: the Lack of “High Seas” Requirement for the Incitement and Intentional Facilitation of Piracy

George White | 27 Emory Int'l L. Rev. 705 (2013)

This commentary seeks to explain and evaluate the reasoning behind the recent finding, in United States v. Ali Mohamed Ali, that acts amounting to the intentional facilitation or incitement of piracy can constitute piracy in international law, and are subject to universal jurisdiction, even when those acts occurred within the territorial jurisdiction of a State. It argues that the decision has a sound basis in the orthodox rules of treaty interpretation. Although some have argued that universal jurisdiction can inhere over acts of piracy only where those acts of piracy occur beyond territorial jurisdiction, there is a strong legal and principled basis for the contrary conclusion. The decision invites a wider discussion of the limits of “intentional facilitation,” brief consideration of which suggests that the lack of a high seas requirement is likely to be expedient and unproblematic.

Read More »

The Federal Circuit Stumbles: U.S. Customs Gets “Green Light” for Indefinite Indecision on Importer Protests

Damon V. Pike | 27 Emory Int'l L. Rev. 719 (2013)

In 2012, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit) issued two precedent-setting decisions that essentially removed the obligation of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) to make timely decisions on Protests filed by importers challenging the assessment of duty on imported merchandise.

Read More »

Applying Double Effect in Armed Conflicts: A Crisis of Legitimacy

Bradley Gershel | 27 Emory Int'l L. Rev. 741 (2013)

Assessing morality in armed conflicts raises a host of issues, not least of which is accounting for the loss of innocent life. For one, normative ethics presumes an absolute deontological proscription against harming the innocent. Yet, both just-war theory and post-war lex scripta affirm the doctrine of military necessity, which permits the loss of innocent life that is “incidentally unavoidable by the armed conflicts of the war.” This qualification is informed by the doctrine of double effect (“DDE”), a product of Catholic theology that serves to legitimize an attack causing “incidental” or “unintended” civilian causalities, provided certain conditions are met.

Read More »