FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W288772016> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W288772016 startingPage "263" @default.
• W288772016 abstract "Is Global Governance Safe for Democracy? Joel Richard Paul* Contemporary critics of international legal institutions often frame their opposition in terms of a conflict between global governance and national democratic accountability. Both liberal and conservative critics view international entities like the United Nations, the World Trade Organization (WTO), or the European Union as steadily infringing upon national autonomy. In the United States, this debate often echoes the isolationist strains of earlier arguments that European colonialism, corruption, revolution, immigration, the League of Nations, or totalitarianism threatened American exceptionalism. Throughout US history, opponents of internationalism have called for disengagement from the world's troubles. The critics of the United Nations and the human rights covenants stand with the opponents of the League and the proponents of the Bricker Amendment as resisting the ceaseless tide of internationalism. That said, Professor Paul Stephan does not fit easily into either the left or the right camp of critics. Stephan has earned a reputation as an independent and original thinker in international His sophisticated critique of global governance focuses on the process of lawmaking rather than on its substance.1 Stephan raises democratic process concerns both with the creation of customary international law and the development of international institutions, which he terms new international law. By addressing the way that international norms develop, rather than the norms themselves, Stephan's thoughtful critique cuts deeper than many other contemporary critiques. I find much in Professor Stephan's analysis persuasive. Nevertheless, in my judgment Stephan both overstates and understates the nature of the challenge that global governance poses to American democracy. One may begin by examining Stephan's argument against customary international Customary international law is the general practice of states accepted as law.2 To prove that a norm is customary international law, one must show that almost all states, or at least an identifiable group of states, actually practice this norm. If a particular state expressly objects to the norm during the norm's formation, the state is not bound by it. States are only bound by norms to which they consent, either implicitly or explicitly. In addition, to prove that a general practice is a customary legal norm and not merely a customary practice, one must show that states follow this practice out of a sense of legal obligation or opinio juris sive necessitates. Stephan points out that courts often rely on the judgment of international legal scholars to determine whether a particular practice is in fact opinio juris. Doubtless, the personal biases of legal scholars inform their opinions and may indirectly influence courts. A legal scholar who opposes the death penalty may be inclined to conclude that the reason virtually all industrialized countries have abandoned capital punishment is out of a sense of opinio juris. In Stephan's view, applying customary international law in US courts has allowed an intellectual elite to impose its political preferences through the courts on an unwitting nation. I have three responses to this democratic process concern. First, customary international law does not spring fully formed like Minerva from the minds of legal academics. The international common law process is both more nuanced and more familiar to our legal system. Legal experts often advise courts about the state of the law, and judges regularly consult treatises and law review articles to help them decide cases. Typically, both sides in a legal dispute might present evidence from scholarly authorities. Judges reach their own opinions based upon the weight of the arguments on both sides. Several mechanisms constrain judicial freedom to decide cases according to principles of customary international …" @default.
• W288772016 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W288772016 creator A5012743687 @default.
• W288772016 date "2000-10-01" @default.
• W288772016 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
• W288772016 title "Is Global Governance Safe for Democracy" @default.
• W288772016 hasPublicationYear "2000" @default.
• W288772016 type Work @default.
• W288772016 sameAs 288772016 @default.
• W288772016 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W288772016 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W288772016 hasAuthorship W288772016A5012743687 @default.
• W288772016 hasConcept C122972321 @default.
• W288772016 hasConcept C138921699 @default.
• W288772016 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W288772016 hasConcept C169437150 @default.
• W288772016 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W288772016 hasConcept C190253527 @default.
• W288772016 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W288772016 hasConcept C2776310101 @default.
• W288772016 hasConcept C55447825 @default.
• W288772016 hasConcept C555826173 @default.
• W288772016 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W288772016 hasConceptScore W288772016C122972321 @default.
• W288772016 hasConceptScore W288772016C138921699 @default.
• W288772016 hasConceptScore W288772016C144024400 @default.
• W288772016 hasConceptScore W288772016C169437150 @default.
• W288772016 hasConceptScore W288772016C17744445 @default.
• W288772016 hasConceptScore W288772016C190253527 @default.
• W288772016 hasConceptScore W288772016C199539241 @default.
• W288772016 hasConceptScore W288772016C2776310101 @default.
• W288772016 hasConceptScore W288772016C55447825 @default.
• W288772016 hasConceptScore W288772016C555826173 @default.
• W288772016 hasConceptScore W288772016C94625758 @default.
• W288772016 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W288772016 hasLocation W2887720161 @default.
• W288772016 hasOpenAccess W288772016 @default.
• W288772016 hasPrimaryLocation W2887720161 @default.
• W288772016 hasRelatedWork W1491579528 @default.
• W288772016 hasRelatedWork W1893190904 @default.
• W288772016 hasRelatedWork W1923524557 @default.
• W288772016 hasRelatedWork W193110485 @default.
• W288772016 hasRelatedWork W201916523 @default.
• W288772016 hasRelatedWork W2030601687 @default.
• W288772016 hasRelatedWork W2150599704 @default.
• W288772016 hasRelatedWork W2162160554 @default.
• W288772016 hasRelatedWork W2168014528 @default.
• W288772016 hasRelatedWork W2175299993 @default.
• W288772016 hasRelatedWork W2310243924 @default.
• W288772016 hasRelatedWork W233016521 @default.
• W288772016 hasRelatedWork W248266377 @default.
• W288772016 hasRelatedWork W2502140166 @default.
• W288772016 hasRelatedWork W2896832837 @default.
• W288772016 hasRelatedWork W3037649072 @default.
• W288772016 hasRelatedWork W3039169161 @default.
• W288772016 hasRelatedWork W3122679275 @default.
• W288772016 hasRelatedWork W3126138188 @default.
• W288772016 hasRelatedWork W81831844 @default.
• W288772016 hasVolume "1" @default.
• W288772016 isParatext "false" @default.
• W288772016 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W288772016 magId "288772016" @default.
• W288772016 workType "article" @default.