International Law in American Courts: A Modest Proposal

This article examines the role of the American judiciary with respect to enforcing international law. It reviews the arguments for and against the adjudication of international issues and distinguishes between so-called horizontal (state-to-state) and vertical (state-to-person) models of international law. She argues that domestic courts do and should adjudicate "vertical" cases while they appropriately back away from "horizontal" cases. She concludes that international law can be understood to fit squarely into traditional forms of domestic adjudication and there is no reason to categorically exclude international claims from American courts. Her argument is not for a new model of international adjudication, but an explicit recognition of the existing model. [Contrast to Harold Koh, Transnational Public Litigation, annotated in this section of the WHRR. While this article does not have a women's rights focus, it is included here because of its relevance to the domestic implementation of international law.]