Open Doors

35 Pages Posted: 2 Oct 2008

See all articles by Paul B. Stephan

Paul B. Stephan

University of Virginia School of Law

Date Written: September 30, 2008


The Supreme Court's decision in Medellin v. Texas has attracted great attention and much criticism from international law specialists. It is unclear, however, how much the opinion constrains future judicial decisions. This article addresses two issues that the Court did not resolve. It argues that, as a general manner, the claim that U.S. courts should accord comity to the decisions of international tribunals rests on a false premise, namely that international tribunals have the capacity to engage in reciprocal relations with domestic judiciaries. Second, the Court has not fully considered in what manner a treaty might delegate authority to the Executive to engage in lawmaking, and what factors a court might depend on to determine that such a delegation has occurred.

Suggested Citation

Stephan, Paul B., Open Doors (September 30, 2008). Lewis & Clark Law Review, Vol. 13, 2008, Available at SSRN:

Paul B. Stephan (Contact Author)

University of Virginia School of Law ( email )

580 Massie Road
Charlottesville, VA 22903
United States
434-924-7098 (Phone)
434-924-7536 (Fax)

Here is the Coronavirus
related research on SSRN

Paper statistics

Abstract Views
PlumX Metrics