In this Response to Jeffrey Meyer’s Dual Illegality and Geoambiguous Law: A New Rule for Extraterritorial Application of U.S. Law, Professor Gibney commends Professor Meyer’s efforts to theorize a comprehensive framework for understanding the extraterritorial scope and limits of United States law. Professor Meyer’s proposal would give a territorial reading to U.S. law unless (1) Congress expressly calls for an extraterritorial application or (2) there is a jurisdictional link to the United States and what is being regulated under U.S. law is also regulated by the law of another state. Professor Gibney argues, however, that the scope of U.S. law should be defined in terms of America’s obligations under international law.
Headnotes
News & Events
-
2012 Symposium Announcement
The Minnesota Law Review is pleased to announce that the 2012 Law Review Symposium will focus on direct democracy and the Minnesota Marriage amendment and will be held at the University of Minnesota Law School on October 26, 2012.
-
2011 Symposium Webstreaming
Live webstreaming for the 2011 Minnesota Law Review Symposium, Citizens United: Democracy Realized—or Defeated?, will be available at: http://www.ustream.tv/channel/minnesota-law-review-symposium-citizens-united-democracy-realized–or-defeated. Be sure to check it out!
-
Article Submission Policy Announcement
On April 19, 2011, the Minnesota Law Review and several peer journals released a joint letter committing to give every author at least seven days to decide whether to accept any offer of publication. Eliminating “exploding offers” will improve the quality of our deliberations and the scholarship that we publish, [...]
-
Congratulations!
Class of 2011 Excellence in Public Service Award recipient: Steve Schmidt (vol. 95 Note & Comment Editor); and Class of 2011 Most Outstanding Contribution Award recipient: Chelsea Brennan (vol. 95 Lead Managing Editor). Congratulations Steve and Chelsea!
-
2011 Minnesota Law Review Symposium
Citizens United: Democracy Realized—or Defeated?
Recent Issues
- Volume 96 – No. 2
- Volume 96 – No. 1
- Volume 95 – No. 6
- Volume 95 – No. 5
- Volume 95 – No. 4
- Volume 95 – No. 3
- Volume 95 – No. 2
- Volume 95 – No. 1
- Volume 94 – No. 6
- Volume 94 – No. 5
- Volume 94 – No. 4
- Volume 94 – No. 3
- Volume 94 – No. 2
- Volume 94 – No. 1
- Volume 93 – No. 6
- Volume 93 – No. 5
- Volume 93 – No. 4
- Volume 93 – No. 3
- Volume 93 – No. 2
- Volume 93 – No. 1
- Volume 92 – No. 6
- Volume 92 – No. 5
- Volume 92 – No. 4
- Volume 92 – No. 3
- Volume 92 – No. 2
- Volume 92 – No. 1
- Volume 91 – No. 6
- Volume 91 – No. 5
- Volume 91 – No. 4
- Volume 91 – No. 3
- Volume 91 – No. 2
- Volume 91 – No. 1
- Volume 90 – No. 6
- Volume 90 – No. 5
- Volume 90 – No. 4
- Volume 90 – No. 3
- Volume 90 – No. 2
- Volume 90 – No. 1