FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W220291501> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W220291501 startingPage "1265" @default.
• W220291501 abstract "Seeing Beyond the Limits of International Law THE LIMITS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW, Jack L. Goldsmith[dagger] & Eric A. Posner.[double dagger] Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005. Pp. 226. $29.95. If the 1990s were for many a time of optimism about the efficacy of international law and legal institutions,1 the first decade of the twenty-first century has brought a backlash, at least in the United States. The Bush administration's hostility to international law is well documented,2 Republicans in Congress are decrying the mere citation of foreign or international sources in U.S. Supreme Court opinions,3 and a cadre of international law scholars, seemingly motivated by concerns that international legal norms might pose undue limitations on state prerogatives or democratic processes, are arguing against the implementation of such norms domestically.4 Even those who are inclined to be more sympathetic to international human rights law have purported to show, through quantitative analysis, that human rights treaties may not affect actual state behavior.5 Many of these attacks, however, misconceive the ways in which international law is most likely to operate. Because international law generally is not backed by coercive force, it of course does not literally bind state actors. Thus, if international law affects behavior at all, it does so far more subtly. For example, it may slowly change attitudes in large populations, effecting shifts in ideas of appropriate state behavior. In addition, international legal norms may well empower constituencies within a domestic polity and provide them with a language for influencing state policy, thereby affording them leverage that they would not otherwise have had at their disposal. Such subtle processes may not, at least on the surface, seem to play a role in constraining state behavior. And they cannot necessarily be measured in immediately quantifiable ways. But, over time, we may see changes that are more profound than those brought about by an ephemeral coercive statute enacted by a legislature. Thus, if we want to study whether international law has real effects, we need to analyze these processes rather than limit our gaze to the question of whether international law binds states coercively. It is for this reason that the latest addition to the international law backlash genre, The Limits of International Law, by Jack Goldsmith and Eric Posner,6 is so disappointing. Tendentious and unpersuasive, the book deploys the simplifying assumptions of rational choice theory in an attempt to demonstrate that international law has no independent valence whatsoever. Rather, according to the authors, each state single-mindedly pursues its rational state interest and therefore obeys international legal norms only to the extent that such norms serve those pre-existing interests. Thus, they argue, international law is sometimes important, but only as a mechanism by which nation-states negotiate power, not as an independent limitation on the prerogatives of state governments. Yet, while there is certainly much work still to be done to fully study the variety of ways in which international legal pronouncements might or might not affect the behavior of state and non-state actors, The Limits of International Law advances the discussion hardly at all. This is because, as with much rational choice analysis,7 Goldsmith and Posner must start with a series of assumptions that effectively clear away almost all of the ways in which international law and legal institutions are most likely to be effective. First, they assume that state interests exist independently of the social context within which the interests are formed. But a policymaker's idea of what is in the state's interest is always and necessarily affected by ideas of appropriate action, and these ideas are likely to be shaped-even if unconsciously-by legal norms, including the norms of international law. …" @default.
• W220291501 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W220291501 creator A5004194271 @default.
• W220291501 date "2006-04-01" @default.
• W220291501 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W220291501 title "Seeing beyond the Limits of International Law" @default.
• W220291501 hasPublicationYear "2006" @default.
• W220291501 type Work @default.
• W220291501 sameAs 220291501 @default.
• W220291501 citedByCount "6" @default.
• W220291501 countsByYear W2202915012012 @default.
• W220291501 countsByYear W2202915012016 @default.
• W220291501 countsByYear W2202915012017 @default.
• W220291501 countsByYear W2202915012018 @default.
• W220291501 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W220291501 hasAuthorship W220291501A5004194271 @default.
• W220291501 hasConcept C11413529 @default.
• W220291501 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W220291501 hasConcept C169437150 @default.
• W220291501 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W220291501 hasConcept C185436325 @default.
• W220291501 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W220291501 hasConcept C2778272461 @default.
• W220291501 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W220291501 hasConcept C48103436 @default.
• W220291501 hasConcept C55447825 @default.
• W220291501 hasConcept C56617239 @default.
• W220291501 hasConcept C8705443 @default.
• W220291501 hasConceptScore W220291501C11413529 @default.
• W220291501 hasConceptScore W220291501C144024400 @default.
• W220291501 hasConceptScore W220291501C169437150 @default.
• W220291501 hasConceptScore W220291501C17744445 @default.
• W220291501 hasConceptScore W220291501C185436325 @default.
• W220291501 hasConceptScore W220291501C199539241 @default.
• W220291501 hasConceptScore W220291501C2778272461 @default.
• W220291501 hasConceptScore W220291501C41008148 @default.
• W220291501 hasConceptScore W220291501C48103436 @default.
• W220291501 hasConceptScore W220291501C55447825 @default.
• W220291501 hasConceptScore W220291501C56617239 @default.
• W220291501 hasConceptScore W220291501C8705443 @default.
• W220291501 hasIssue "5" @default.
• W220291501 hasLocation W2202915011 @default.
• W220291501 hasOpenAccess W220291501 @default.
• W220291501 hasPrimaryLocation W2202915011 @default.
• W220291501 hasRelatedWork W1513772070 @default.
• W220291501 hasRelatedWork W1525328408 @default.
• W220291501 hasRelatedWork W1547778023 @default.
• W220291501 hasRelatedWork W1561792986 @default.
• W220291501 hasRelatedWork W185831678 @default.
• W220291501 hasRelatedWork W2137063751 @default.
• W220291501 hasRelatedWork W224101162 @default.
• W220291501 hasRelatedWork W2254205705 @default.
• W220291501 hasRelatedWork W2262212810 @default.
• W220291501 hasRelatedWork W2277790422 @default.
• W220291501 hasRelatedWork W231675370 @default.
• W220291501 hasRelatedWork W23243246 @default.
• W220291501 hasRelatedWork W2329720779 @default.
• W220291501 hasRelatedWork W2770963693 @default.
• W220291501 hasRelatedWork W2979610606 @default.
• W220291501 hasRelatedWork W3021213251 @default.
• W220291501 hasRelatedWork W3121588162 @default.
• W220291501 hasRelatedWork W3123530466 @default.
• W220291501 hasRelatedWork W328502676 @default.
• W220291501 hasRelatedWork W1863790379 @default.
• W220291501 hasVolume "84" @default.
• W220291501 isParatext "false" @default.
• W220291501 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W220291501 magId "220291501" @default.
• W220291501 workType "article" @default.