Lori Fisler Damrosch

Politics Across Borders: Nonintervention and Nonforcible Influence over Domestic Affairs

It is time for a fresh look at the norm of nonintervention in domestic affairs, as applied to nonforcible efforts to influence another state’s internal politics. The existence of such a norm is widely proclaimed, and it is commonly assumed to be a legal obligation rather than a mere practice of comity or aspirational objective. For governments, scholars and international organs alike, the “rule” against interference in internal politics seems to be an article of faith; but despite the frequency of its incantation in international discourse, how the norm applies to nonforcible conduct is inadequately understood.

The International Court of Justice at a crossroads

This major study of the International Court of Justice was the first comprehensive analysis of the issues confronting governments in reexamining the scope of their consent to the Courts jurisdiction. Topics include the suitability of various kinds of disputes for resolution by the Court; problems of non-appearance, non-participation, and non-performance; provisional measures; and more.

The Impact of the Nicaragua Case on the Court and Its Role: Harmful, Helpful, or In Between?

At the time the United States withdrew from participation in the Nicaragua case at the International Court of Justice, the US government expressed concern that ‘the course on which the Court may now be embarked could do enormous harm to it as an institution and to the cause of international law’. This essay examines whether or to what extent the anticipated negative effects came to pass. It concludes that dire predictions of harm to the Court were overstated. Twenty-five years later, the rate at which states accept the Courts jurisdiction has held steady. Only a few states have added jurisdictional reservations concerning military activities. The mix of cases being brought to the Court has shifted towards a more representative distribution. States are generally complying with the Courts decisions, though some compliance problems remain. The most serious negative impact has been on the willingness of the United States (still the Courts most active litigant) to participate fully in international dispute settlement.

The "American" and the "International" in the American Journal of International Law

The American Journal of International Law (AJIL) stands in dialectical tension between its American and its international identities. At its founding, and in periodic reassessments on the occasion of anniversaries or changes of leadership, its editors in chief have offered their understandings of the place for this Journal at the intersection of American and international life. One of our predecessors wrote in the Journal’s sixth decade of “a dual function, both that of laying international law material before American readers, and that of placing American viewpoints on international law before the rest of the world.” Poised at the threshold of a new century, we can take this opportunity for reflection in the image of Janus on both our American (internationalist) origins and our increasingly international (yet in some senses still American) future.