Carlos Manuel Vázquez
Biographic Data
| ID | 5698192 |
|---|---|
| NAME | Carlos Manuel Vázquez |
| GIVEN NAMES | Carlos Manuel |
| FAMILY NAME | Vázquez |
| SIGNATURE | VÁZQUEZ C M |
| AFFILIATIONS | Georgetown University |
| VERIFIED | No |
| TOTAL WORKS | 16 |
| TOTAL CITATIONS | 15 |
| AUTHOR COUNT | 16 |
| EDITOR COUNT | 0 |
| FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR | 1988 |
| LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2016 |
| H-INDEX | 2 |
Introduction to Agora: Reflections on RJR Nabisco v. European Community
An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. As you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button
Introduction to Symposium on the Third Restatement of Conflict of Laws
The American Law Institute (ALI) has recently embarked on the project of elaborating a new Restatement of Conflict of Laws. Its first two Restatements on this subject have been enormously influential. The Ali began its work on the First Restatement in 1923, naming Joseph Beale of the Harvard Law School as its Reporter. Adopted in 1934, the First Restatement reflected the highly territorialist approach to the conflict of laws that had long prevail…
Out-Beale-Ing Beale
In response to the 1991 Supreme Court decision resuscitating the presumption against extraterritoriality [hereinafter "PAE" or "presumption"],EEOC v. Arabian American Oil Co.(Aramco), Larry Kramer described the presumption as an anachronism-a throwback to the strict territorialist approach to choice of law that prevailed before the mid-Twentieth Century but has been mostly abandoned since then. The title of his scathing article,Vestiges of Beale,…
Introduction to Agora, Part II: Reflections on Zivotofsky v. Kerry
Zivotofsky v. Kerry (Zivotofsky II). 1 As we explained in our introduction to the first part of the Agora published in July, Zivotofsky II is a significant separation-of-powers decision concerning the exclusivity of the President's authority to recognize foreign sovereigns and their territory. 2 The essays in the first part of the Agora, by Curtis
Introduction to Continuation of Symposium on the International Legal Obligation to Criminalize Marital Rape
AJIL Unbound is pleased to publish a second set of contributions to our symposium on the obligation of states under international law to criminalize marital rape. The lead essay by Melanie Randall and Vasanthi Venkatesh, Criminalizing Sexual Violence against Women in Intimate Relationships: State Obligations Under Human Rights Law, argues that international law requires the criminalization of sexual violence against women within marriage (and oth…
Introduction to Symposium on the International Legal Obligation to Criminalize Marital Rape
An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. As you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button
Introduction to Agora: Reflections on Zivotofsky v. Kerry
AJIL Unbound is pleased to publish an Agora on the Supreme Court's recent decision in Zivotofsky v. Kerry (Zivotofsky II). 1 This highly anticipated separation-of-powers decision addresses the validity of congressional action alleged to intrude upon the President's exclusive power to recognize foreign sovereigns. The petitioner in Zivotofsky was born in Jerusalem and wished to have his birthplace designated on his passport as "Israel." Because th…
Alien Tort Claims and the Status of Customary International Law
Much of the recent debate about the status of customary international law in the U.S. legal system has revolved around the alien tort provision of the Judiciary Act of 1789, currently section 1350 of Title 28. In Filártiga v. Peña-Irala , the decision that launched modern human rights litigation in the United States, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit relied on the view that customary international law has the status of federal common la…
Less Than Zero
Medellín v. Texas is the first case in which the Supreme Court has denied a treaty-based claim solely on the ground that the treaty relied upon was non-self-executing. In Foster v. Neilson , the only other case in which the Court had denied relief on this ground, the Court offered its view that the treaty was non-self-executing as an alternative ground for denying relief. The Court soon thereafter disavowed its conclusion that the treaty involved…
La aparición de los discursos sobre el multiculturalismo en España: El debate del velo en la prensa escrita
The veil debate is a paradigmatic example of the complicated political, social and media issue raised by multiculturalism. In this article I analyze the main arguments in favour and against the use of hijab in general, and specifically to its use in school. At the same time, I will examine the Spanish debate on the veil, which took place in 2002, when Fatima, a Moroccan girl, tried to attend school wearing the hijab. I will centre my analysis on …
The Military Commissions Act, the Geneva Conventions, and the Courts: A Critical Guide
The Military Commissions Act of 2006 (MCA) was precipitated by several of the United States Supreme Court’s holdings in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld . First, the administration perceived the need to respond to the Court’s invalidation of the military commissions established pursuant to the president’s Military Order of November 13,2001, as contrary to Congress’s stipulation that such tribunals conform to the laws of war. In addition, the Court’s holding th…
Altmann v. Austria and the Retroactivity of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act
In Republic of Austria v. Altmann, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 (FSIA) generally applies to claims based on events that occurred before the Statute's enactment. To decide the retroactivity question, the Court had occasion to consider the essential nature of foreign sovereign immunity: is it merely a procedural immunity providing foreign states with present protection from the inconvenience and i…
Breard and the Federal Power to Require Compliance With ICJ Orders of Provisional Measures
Among the puzzling aspects of the Breard episode was the Clinton administration’s claim that the decision whether or not to comply with the Order of the International Court of Justice requiring the postponement of Breard’s execution lay exclusively in the hands of the Governor of Virginia. The ICJ’s Order provided that “[t]he United States should take all measures at its disposal to ensure that Angel Francisco Breard is not executed pending the f…
The Four Doctrines of Self-Executing Treaties
A distinction has become entrenched in United States law between treaties that are “self-executing” and those that are not. The precise nature of this distinction—indeed, its very existence—is a matter of some controversy’ and much confusion. More than one lower federal court has pronounced the distinction to be the “most confounding” in the United States law of treaties. A tremendous amount of scholarship has sought to clarify this distinction, …
Argentine Republic v. Amerada Hess Shipping Corp
Plaintiffs and respondents, Amerada Hess Shipping Corp. and United Carriers, Inc., were respectively the charterer and owner of the Hercules , a crude oil tanker that was bombed in international waters by Argentine military aircraft during the war over the Malvinas or Falkland Islands. The ship was severely damaged and had to be scuttled off the coast of Brazil. After unsuccessfully seeking relief in Argentina, the companies filed suit against de…
Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft v. Schlunk
In this first decision by the United States Supreme Court on the scope and application of the Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters, better known as the Hague Service Convention, petitioner, a West German company, challenged the respondent’s attempt to serve process on petitioner by serving its wholly owned U.S. subsidiary in accordance with the state’s rules rather than pursuant t…
The Military Commissions Act, the Geneva Conventions, and the Courts: A Critical Guide
The Military Commissions Act of 2006 (MCA) was precipitated by several of the United States Supreme Court’s holdings in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld . First, the administration perceived the need to respond to the Court’s invalidation of the military commissions established pursuant to the president’s Military Order of November 13,2001, as contrary to Congress’s stipulation that such tribunals conform to the laws of war. In addition, the Court’s holding th…
The Four Doctrines of Self-Executing Treaties
A distinction has become entrenched in United States law between treaties that are “self-executing” and those that are not. The precise nature of this distinction—indeed, its very existence—is a matter of some controversy’ and much confusion. More than one lower federal court has pronounced the distinction to be the “most confounding” in the United States law of treaties. A tremendous amount of scholarship has sought to clarify this distinction, …
Alien Tort Claims and the Status of Customary International Law
Much of the recent debate about the status of customary international law in the U.S. legal system has revolved around the alien tort provision of the Judiciary Act of 1789, currently section 1350 of Title 28. In Filártiga v. Peña-Irala , the decision that launched modern human rights litigation in the United States, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit relied on the view that customary international law has the status of federal common la…
Introduction to Agora: Reflections on Zivotofsky v. Kerry
AJIL Unbound is pleased to publish an Agora on the Supreme Court's recent decision in Zivotofsky v. Kerry (Zivotofsky II). 1 This highly anticipated separation-of-powers decision addresses the validity of congressional action alleged to intrude upon the President's exclusive power to recognize foreign sovereigns. The petitioner in Zivotofsky was born in Jerusalem and wished to have his birthplace designated on his passport as "Israel." Because th…
Less Than Zero
Medellín v. Texas is the first case in which the Supreme Court has denied a treaty-based claim solely on the ground that the treaty relied upon was non-self-executing. In Foster v. Neilson , the only other case in which the Court had denied relief on this ground, the Court offered its view that the treaty was non-self-executing as an alternative ground for denying relief. The Court soon thereafter disavowed its conclusion that the treaty involved…
Altmann v. Austria and the Retroactivity of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act
In Republic of Austria v. Altmann, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 (FSIA) generally applies to claims based on events that occurred before the Statute's enactment. To decide the retroactivity question, the Court had occasion to consider the essential nature of foreign sovereign immunity: is it merely a procedural immunity providing foreign states with present protection from the inconvenience and i…
Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft v. Schlunk
In this first decision by the United States Supreme Court on the scope and application of the Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters, better known as the Hague Service Convention, petitioner, a West German company, challenged the respondent’s attempt to serve process on petitioner by serving its wholly owned U.S. subsidiary in accordance with the state’s rules rather than pursuant t…
Argentine Republic v. Amerada Hess Shipping Corp
Plaintiffs and respondents, Amerada Hess Shipping Corp. and United Carriers, Inc., were respectively the charterer and owner of the Hercules , a crude oil tanker that was bombed in international waters by Argentine military aircraft during the war over the Malvinas or Falkland Islands. The ship was severely damaged and had to be scuttled off the coast of Brazil. After unsuccessfully seeking relief in Argentina, the companies filed suit against de…
The Four Doctrines of Self-Executing Treaties
A distinction has become entrenched in United States law between treaties that are “self-executing” and those that are not. The precise nature of this distinction—indeed, its very existence—is a matter of some controversy’ and much confusion. More than one lower federal court has pronounced the distinction to be the “most confounding” in the United States law of treaties. A tremendous amount of scholarship has sought to clarify this distinction, …
Breard and the Federal Power to Require Compliance With ICJ Orders of Provisional Measures
Among the puzzling aspects of the Breard episode was the Clinton administration’s claim that the decision whether or not to comply with the Order of the International Court of Justice requiring the postponement of Breard’s execution lay exclusively in the hands of the Governor of Virginia. The ICJ’s Order provided that “[t]he United States should take all measures at its disposal to ensure that Angel Francisco Breard is not executed pending the f…
Altmann v. Austria and the Retroactivity of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act
In Republic of Austria v. Altmann, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 (FSIA) generally applies to claims based on events that occurred before the Statute's enactment. To decide the retroactivity question, the Court had occasion to consider the essential nature of foreign sovereign immunity: is it merely a procedural immunity providing foreign states with present protection from the inconvenience and i…
La aparición de los discursos sobre el multiculturalismo en España: El debate del velo en la prensa escrita
The veil debate is a paradigmatic example of the complicated political, social and media issue raised by multiculturalism. In this article I analyze the main arguments in favour and against the use of hijab in general, and specifically to its use in school. At the same time, I will examine the Spanish debate on the veil, which took place in 2002, when Fatima, a Moroccan girl, tried to attend school wearing the hijab. I will centre my analysis on …
The Military Commissions Act, the Geneva Conventions, and the Courts: A Critical Guide
The Military Commissions Act of 2006 (MCA) was precipitated by several of the United States Supreme Court’s holdings in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld . First, the administration perceived the need to respond to the Court’s invalidation of the military commissions established pursuant to the president’s Military Order of November 13,2001, as contrary to Congress’s stipulation that such tribunals conform to the laws of war. In addition, the Court’s holding th…
Less Than Zero
Medellín v. Texas is the first case in which the Supreme Court has denied a treaty-based claim solely on the ground that the treaty relied upon was non-self-executing. In Foster v. Neilson , the only other case in which the Court had denied relief on this ground, the Court offered its view that the treaty was non-self-executing as an alternative ground for denying relief. The Court soon thereafter disavowed its conclusion that the treaty involved…
Alien Tort Claims and the Status of Customary International Law
Much of the recent debate about the status of customary international law in the U.S. legal system has revolved around the alien tort provision of the Judiciary Act of 1789, currently section 1350 of Title 28. In Filártiga v. Peña-Irala , the decision that launched modern human rights litigation in the United States, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit relied on the view that customary international law has the status of federal common la…
Introduction to Agora, Part II: Reflections on Zivotofsky v. Kerry
Zivotofsky v. Kerry (Zivotofsky II). 1 As we explained in our introduction to the first part of the Agora published in July, Zivotofsky II is a significant separation-of-powers decision concerning the exclusivity of the President's authority to recognize foreign sovereigns and their territory. 2 The essays in the first part of the Agora, by Curtis
Introduction to Continuation of Symposium on the International Legal Obligation to Criminalize Marital Rape
AJIL Unbound is pleased to publish a second set of contributions to our symposium on the obligation of states under international law to criminalize marital rape. The lead essay by Melanie Randall and Vasanthi Venkatesh, Criminalizing Sexual Violence against Women in Intimate Relationships: State Obligations Under Human Rights Law, argues that international law requires the criminalization of sexual violence against women within marriage (and oth…
Introduction to Symposium on the International Legal Obligation to Criminalize Marital Rape
An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. As you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button
Introduction to Agora: Reflections on Zivotofsky v. Kerry
AJIL Unbound is pleased to publish an Agora on the Supreme Court's recent decision in Zivotofsky v. Kerry (Zivotofsky II). 1 This highly anticipated separation-of-powers decision addresses the validity of congressional action alleged to intrude upon the President's exclusive power to recognize foreign sovereigns. The petitioner in Zivotofsky was born in Jerusalem and wished to have his birthplace designated on his passport as "Israel." Because th…
Introduction to Agora: Reflections on RJR Nabisco v. European Community
An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. As you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button
Introduction to Symposium on the Third Restatement of Conflict of Laws
The American Law Institute (ALI) has recently embarked on the project of elaborating a new Restatement of Conflict of Laws. Its first two Restatements on this subject have been enormously influential. The Ali began its work on the First Restatement in 1923, naming Joseph Beale of the Harvard Law School as its Reporter. Adopted in 1934, the First Restatement reflected the highly territorialist approach to the conflict of laws that had long prevail…
Out-Beale-Ing Beale
In response to the 1991 Supreme Court decision resuscitating the presumption against extraterritoriality [hereinafter "PAE" or "presumption"],EEOC v. Arabian American Oil Co.(Aramco), Larry Kramer described the presumption as an anachronism-a throwback to the strict territorialist approach to choice of law that prevailed before the mid-Twentieth Century but has been mostly abandoned since then. The title of his scathing article,Vestiges of Beale,…
Political science (13 works) · Law (11 works) · International Law and Aviation (9 works) · Law (9 works) · International Law and Human Rights (8 works) · Supreme court (8 works) · International law (6 works) · Sociology (6 works) · Conflict of Laws and Jurisdiction (4 works) · Physics (4 works)