Must Treaty Violations Be Remedied? A Critique of Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon

18 Pages Posted: 9 Nov 2007  

John Bernard Quigley

Ohio State University (OSU) - Michael E. Moritz College of Law

Date Written: November 2007

Abstract

In its 2006 decision in Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon, the Supreme Court of the United States declined to provide a requested remedy for a treaty violation on the grounds that the particular remedy was not mentioned in the treaty itself. The article criticizes this approach by the Court to remedies. In treaty law, as in domestic contract law, remedies need not be specified in the agreement. They are found in a separate body of law. The Supreme Court ignored this body of law. The article explains how remedies are provided in international law for treaty violations and suggests that the Supreme Court apply this body of law in future cases of treaty violations.

Keywords: Vienna Convention, Consular Relations, law of state responsibility, Amiable Isabella

JEL Classification: K33, K41, K42

Suggested Citation

Quigley, John Bernard, Must Treaty Violations Be Remedied? A Critique of Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon (November 2007). Ohio State Public Law Working Paper No. 110. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1028064 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1028064

John Bernard Quigley (Contact Author)

Ohio State University (OSU) - Michael E. Moritz College of Law ( email )

55 West 12th Avenue
Columbus, OH 43210
United States

Paper statistics

Downloads
106
Rank
209,787
Abstract Views
625