Fill This Form To Receive Instant Help

Help in Homework
trustpilot ratings
google ratings


Homework answers / question archive / Question 2 – International Human Rights Claims in U

Question 2 – International Human Rights Claims in U

Law

Question 2 – International Human Rights Claims in U.S. Courts (maximum word count 750)

Consider Justice Souter's opinion in Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain and Justice Roberts' opinion in

Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co.

A. Describe and analyze the holding and importance of each case.

B. Compare the two opinions and their logic. What are the most important ways in which they are different from each other? Why do these differences matter?

C. In your opinion, which opinion provides the better approach to addressing international law claims in U.S. courts? Please explain your answer.

Question 3 – Sources of International Law (maximum word count 750)

A. What is the role of treaties as a source of international law. How are treaties formed and under what circumstances are they binding?

B. What is the role of custom under international law? What are the elements of customary international law? Under what circumstances is it binding?

C. Consider the following statement. Argue either in favor of or against the position in the statement.

Customary international law facilitated and accompanied the rise of colonialism.

It has safeguarded the interests of wealthy Western states and prioritized

Western legal traditions. As such, customary international law should not be considered an important source of binding international law. Instead, the sole legitimate form of international law is the law of treaties. The International Court of Justice, other international courts, and domestic courts should not consider custom when adjudicating international disputes.

Question 4 – Humanitarian Intervention (maximum word count 750)

A former U.S. government official made the following argument. He advocates the creation of an exception to the general rule prohibiting humanitarian intervention.

International lawyers in and out of government should define a narrow exception to Article 2(4) of the U.N. Charter that would clarify the contours of a lawful exception to a rigid rule that humanitarian intervention is always illegal.

The creation of such a narrow exception would better balance the risks of over and under-action in the most dire humanitarian situations.

A. Explain the meaning of Article 2(4) and how it affects humanitarian intervention.

B. Draft an exception to Article 2(4) that would accomplish the goals described above.

C. Justify your exception. How does your proposal address cases in which you favor intervention? How does it exclude cases in which you would oppose it? What are the principled limits on the overuse of humanitarian intervention?

 

International Law Spring 2021 • Prof. Patrick Keenan FINAL EXAMINATION INSTRUCTIONS 1. You have 24 hours to complete the exam and submit your answer from the time you receive the questions. 2. You must return your answer to Amy Fitzgerald at amfitzge@illinois.edu. Do not return the answer to me because that may compromise my policy of anonymous grading. 3. Your answer must be submitted as a Word document. No other format is permitted. Copy yourself on the e-mail. 4. You may not share, post, or otherwise make available the exam questions to anyone. 5. The exam is open-book and open-notes. Consultation of any person other than me is a violation of the Honor Code. You may not collaborate with anyone else, share information, or otherwise discuss the exam or your answers. The rules contained in the Exam Memo previously circulated by email and posted on our Compass page also govern this exam. 6. Identify yourself only by your anonymous exam number. Do not put your name anywhere on your answer. 7. You need not provide complete case names or the precise section numbers of statutes or other documents. You may provide shortened case names so long as I can understand which case you are discussing. 8. The exam consists of 4 questions. Answer all questions. Your response to each question must be no longer than 750 words. Provide the word count at the beginning of your answer to each question. 9. For your information, among the factors I will consider when I grade the exams are the following: (a) How well the answer clearly identifies and discusses the relevant issues; (b) Whether the answer neglects important issues; (c) How well the answer clearly and fully explains the law and policy regarding the issues identified; and (d) The organization, clarity, and coherence of the answer. 1 INTERNATIONAL LAW ? FINAL EXAMINATION Instructions: There are four numbered questions. Answer all questions. Your response to each numbered question must be no longer than 750 words. Each numbered question is worth the same number of points, but the subparts may not be of equal weight. Base your answers on the material we covered in class. Do not do any outside research. Do not consult with any other students in the class. Question 1 – Attribution of Conduct to States (maximum word count 750) Consider the decisions in the cases listed below and answer the following questions. A. Describe and analyze the attribution rules provided in each case. B. Compare the attribution rules to each other. In what ways are they different? In what ways are they the same? C. Make the strongest argument you can in favor of one of the three approaches and against the other two. ? Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua, ICJ ? Prosecutor v. Tadic, ICTY ? Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, ICJ Question 2 – International Human Rights Claims in U.S. Courts (maximum word count 750) Consider Justice Souter's opinion in Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain and Justice Roberts' opinion in Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co. A. Describe and analyze the holding and importance of each case. B. Compare the two opinions and their logic. What are the most important ways in which they are different from each other? Why do these differences matter? C. In your opinion, which opinion provides the better approach to addressing international law claims in U.S. courts? Please explain your answer. 2 Question 3 – Sources of International Law (maximum word count 750) A. What is the role of treaties as a source of international law. How are treaties formed and under what circumstances are they binding? B. What is the role of custom under international law? What are the elements of customary international law? Under what circumstances is it binding? C. Consider to the following statement. Argue either in favor of or against the position in the statement. Customary international law facilitated and accompanied the rise of colonialism. It has safeguarded the interests of wealthy Western states and prioritized Western legal traditions. As such, customary international law should not be considered an important source of binding international law. Instead, the sole legitimate form of international law is the law of treaties. The International Court of Justice, other international courts, and domestic courts should not consider custom when adjudicating international disputes. Question 4 – Humanitarian Intervention (maximum word count 750) A former U.S. government official made the following argument. He advocates the creation of an exception to the general rule prohibiting humanitarian intervention. International lawyers in and out of government should define a narrow exception to Article 2(4) of the U.N. Charter that would clarify the contours of a lawful exception to a rigid rule that humanitarian intervention is always illegal. The creation of such a narrow exception would better balance the risks of overand under-action in the most dire humanitarian situations. A. Explain the meaning of Article 2(4) and how it affects humanitarian intervention. B. Draft an exception to Article 2(4) that would accomplish the goals described above. C. Justify your exception. How does your proposal address cases in which you favor intervention? How does it exclude cases in which you would oppose it? What are the principled limits on the overuse of humanitarian intervention? 3 International Law Spring 2021 • Prof. Patrick Keenan FINAL EXAMINATION INSTRUCTIONS 1. You have 24 hours to complete the exam and submit your answer from the time you receive the questions. 2. You must return your answer to Amy Fitzgerald at amfitzge@illinois.edu. Do not return the answer to me because that may compromise my policy of anonymous grading. 3. Your answer must be submitted as a Word document. No other format is permitted. Copy yourself on the e-mail. 4. You may not share, post, or otherwise make available the exam questions to anyone. 5. The exam is open-book and open-notes. Consultation of any person other than me is a violation of the Honor Code. You may not collaborate with anyone else, share information, or otherwise discuss the exam or your answers. The rules contained in the Exam Memo previously circulated by email and posted on our Compass page also govern this exam. 6. Identify yourself only by your anonymous exam number. Do not put your name anywhere on your answer. 7. You need not provide complete case names or the precise section numbers of statutes or other documents. You may provide shortened case names so long as I can understand which case you are discussing. 8. The exam consists of 4 questions. Answer all questions. Your response to each question must be no longer than 750 words. Provide the word count at the beginning of your answer to each question. 9. For your information, among the factors I will consider when I grade the exams are the following: (a) How well the answer clearly identifies and discusses the relevant issues; (b) Whether the answer neglects important issues; (c) How well the answer clearly and fully explains the law and policy regarding the issues identified; and (d) The organization, clarity, and coherence of the answer. 1 INTERNATIONAL LAW ? FINAL EXAMINATION Instructions: There are four numbered questions. Answer all questions. Your response to each numbered question must be no longer than 750 words. Each numbered question is worth the same number of points, but the subparts may not be of equal weight. Base your answers on the material we covered in class. Do not do any outside research. Do not consult with any other students in the class. Question 1 – Attribution of Conduct to States (maximum word count 750) Consider the decisions in the cases listed below and answer the following questions. A. Describe and analyze the attribution rules provided in each case. B. Compare the attribution rules to each other. In what ways are they different? In what ways are they the same? C. Make the strongest argument you can in favor of one of the three approaches and against the other two. ? Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua, ICJ ? Prosecutor v. Tadic, ICTY ? Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, ICJ Question 2 – International Human Rights Claims in U.S. Courts (maximum word count 750) Consider Justice Souter's opinion in Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain and Justice Roberts' opinion in Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co. A. Describe and analyze the holding and importance of each case. B. Compare the two opinions and their logic. What are the most important ways in which they are different from each other? Why do these differences matter? C. In your opinion, which opinion provides the better approach to addressing international law claims in U.S. courts? Please explain your answer. 2 Question 3 – Sources of International Law (maximum word count 750) A. What is the role of treaties as a source of international law. How are treaties formed and under what circumstances are they binding? B. What is the role of custom under international law? What are the elements of customary international law? Under what circumstances is it binding? C. Consider to the following statement. Argue either in favor of or against the position in the statement. Customary international law facilitated and accompanied the rise of colonialism. It has safeguarded the interests of wealthy Western states and prioritized Western legal traditions. As such, customary international law should not be considered an important source of binding international law. Instead, the sole legitimate form of international law is the law of treaties. The International Court of Justice, other international courts, and domestic courts should not consider custom when adjudicating international disputes. Question 4 – Humanitarian Intervention (maximum word count 750) A former U.S. government official made the following argument. He advocates the creation of an exception to the general rule prohibiting humanitarian intervention. International lawyers in and out of government should define a narrow exception to Article 2(4) of the U.N. Charter that would clarify the contours of a lawful exception to a rigid rule that humanitarian intervention is always illegal. The creation of such a narrow exception would better balance the risks of overand under-action in the most dire humanitarian situations. A. Explain the meaning of Article 2(4) and how it affects humanitarian intervention. B. Draft an exception to Article 2(4) that would accomplish the goals described above. C. Justify your exception. How does your proposal address cases in which you favor intervention? How does it exclude cases in which you would oppose it? What are the principled limits on the overuse of humanitarian intervention? 3 International Law Spring 2021 • Prof. Patrick Keenan FINAL EXAMINATION INSTRUCTIONS 1. You have 24 hours to complete the exam and submit your answer from the time you receive the questions. 2. You must return your answer to Amy Fitzgerald at amfitzge@illinois.edu. Do not return the answer to me because that may compromise my policy of anonymous grading. 3. Your answer must be submitted as a Word document. No other format is permitted. Copy yourself on the e-mail. 4. You may not share, post, or otherwise make available the exam questions to anyone. 5. The exam is open-book and open-notes. Consultation of any person other than me is a violation of the Honor Code. You may not collaborate with anyone else, share information, or otherwise discuss the exam or your answers. The rules contained in the Exam Memo previously circulated by email and posted on our Compass page also govern this exam. 6. Identify yourself only by your anonymous exam number. Do not put your name anywhere on your answer. 7. You need not provide complete case names or the precise section numbers of statutes or other documents. You may provide shortened case names so long as I can understand which case you are discussing. 8. The exam consists of 4 questions. Answer all questions. Your response to each question must be no longer than 750 words. Provide the word count at the beginning of your answer to each question. 9. For your information, among the factors I will consider when I grade the exams are the following: (a) How well the answer clearly identifies and discusses the relevant issues; (b) Whether the answer neglects important issues; (c) How well the answer clearly and fully explains the law and policy regarding the issues identified; and (d) The organization, clarity, and coherence of the answer. 1 INTERNATIONAL LAW ? FINAL EXAMINATION Instructions: There are four numbered questions. Answer all questions. Your response to each numbered question must be no longer than 750 words. Each numbered question is worth the same number of points, but the subparts may not be of equal weight. Base your answers on the material we covered in class. Do not do any outside research. Do not consult with any other students in the class. Question 1 – Attribution of Conduct to States (maximum word count 750) Consider the decisions in the cases listed below and answer the following questions. A. Describe and analyze the attribution rules provided in each case. B. Compare the attribution rules to each other. In what ways are they different? In what ways are they the same? C. Make the strongest argument you can in favor of one of the three approaches and against the other two. ? Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua, ICJ ? Prosecutor v. Tadic, ICTY ? Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, ICJ Question 2 – International Human Rights Claims in U.S. Courts (maximum word count 750) Consider Justice Souter's opinion in Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain and Justice Roberts' opinion in Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co. A. Describe and analyze the holding and importance of each case. B. Compare the two opinions and their logic. What are the most important ways in which they are different from each other? Why do these differences matter? C. In your opinion, which opinion provides the better approach to addressing international law claims in U.S. courts? Please explain your answer. 2 Question 3 – Sources of International Law (maximum word count 750) A. What is the role of treaties as a source of international law. How are treaties formed and under what circumstances are they binding? B. What is the role of custom under international law? What are the elements of customary international law? Under what circumstances is it binding? C. Consider to the following statement. Argue either in favor of or against the position in the statement. Customary international law facilitated and accompanied the rise of colonialism. It has safeguarded the interests of wealthy Western states and prioritized Western legal traditions. As such, customary international law should not be considered an important source of binding international law. Instead, the sole legitimate form of international law is the law of treaties. The International Court of Justice, other international courts, and domestic courts should not consider custom when adjudicating international disputes. Question 4 – Humanitarian Intervention (maximum word count 750) A former U.S. government official made the following argument. He advocates the creation of an exception to the general rule prohibiting humanitarian intervention. International lawyers in and out of government should define a narrow exception to Article 2(4) of the U.N. Charter that would clarify the contours of a lawful exception to a rigid rule that humanitarian intervention is always illegal. The creation of such a narrow exception would better balance the risks of overand under-action in the most dire humanitarian situations. A. Explain the meaning of Article 2(4) and how it affects humanitarian intervention. B. Draft an exception to Article 2(4) that would accomplish the goals described above. C. Justify your exception. How does your proposal address cases in which you favor intervention? How does it exclude cases in which you would oppose it? What are the principled limits on the overuse of humanitarian intervention? 3

Option 1

Low Cost Option
Download this past answer in few clicks

15.89 USD

PURCHASE SOLUTION

Already member?


Option 2

Custom new solution created by our subject matter experts

GET A QUOTE

Related Questions