Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-swr86 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-21T08:32:19.747Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Introductory Remarks by Carlos M. Vazquez

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2017

Carlos M. Vásquez
Carlos M. Vásquez*
Affiliation:
Georgetown University Law Center
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Judicial Enforcement of Treaties: Self-Execution and Related Doctrines
Information
Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting , Volume 100 , 2006 , pp. 439 - 441
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

* Mr. Kesavan did not contribute remarks.

1 See Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 344 F.Supp. 2d 152 (D.D.C. 2004), rev’d, 415 F.3d 33 (D.C. Cir.), cert, granted, 126 S. Ct. 622 (2005).

2 Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 415 F.3d 33 (D.C. Cir.), cert, granted, 126 S. Ct. 622 (2005).

3 Id. at 38-40.

4 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, Art. 36, Apr. 23, 1963, 21 UST 77, 596 UNTS 261.

5 State v. Sanchez-Llamas, 338 Or. 267, 276-77 (2005), cert, granted, 126 S. Ct. 620 (2005).

6 See Brief of Petitioner, Bustillo v. Johnson, No. 05-51 (Dec. 2005).

7 See Brief of Respondents at 30-32, Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, No. 05-184 (Feb. 2006).

8 See Yoo, John C. Globalism and the Constitution: Treaties, Non-Self-Execution, and the Original Understanding, 99 Colum. L. Rev. 1955, 2087 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; but cf. Vázquez, Carlos Manuel, Laughing at Treaties, 99 Colum. L. Rev. 2154, 2193 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar (disputing Yoo’s claims).

9 Brief of Respondents, supra note 7, at 30.

10 27 U.S. (2 Pet.) 253, 314 (1829).

11 See Brief of Respondents, supra note 7, at 30 (quoting Head Money Cases, 112 U.S. 580, 598 (1884).

12 Head Money Cases, 112 U.S. at 598-99. See also Hamdan, 415 F.3d at 38-39.

13 See United States v. Rauscher, 119 U.S. 407, 417 (1886), where the Court made clear that the passages cited by the Solicitor General and the Court of Appeals address the “difference between the judicial powers of the courts of Great Britain and of this country in regard to treaties.”

14 Id. at 418.

15 Id. at 419. See generally Brief of Louis Henkin et al. as Amici Curiae, Hamdan (No. 05-184).

16 See Vázquez, Carlos Manuel, The Four Doctrines of Self-Executing Treaties, 89 AJIL 695 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

17 See id. at 719-22.

18 Even the Court of Appeals in Hamdan recognized that “[t]he availability of habeas may obviate a petitioner’s need to rely on a private right of action.” Hamdan, 415 F.3d at 40 (citing Wang v. Ashcroft, 320 F.3d 130, 140-41 & n. 16 (2d Cir. 2003)).