Reasonableness in the Restatement (Fourth) of Foreign Relations Law

19 Pages Posted: 16 May 2019

See all articles by William S. Dodge

William S. Dodge

University of California, Davis - School of Law

Date Written: April 16, 2019

Abstract

This symposium essay compares the different conceptions of reasonableness in the Restatement (Third) of Foreign Relations Law and the Restatement (Fourth) of Foreign Relations Law. Part I discusses Section 403 of the Restatement (Third), recounting its origins and the subsequent failure of courts in the United States and abroad to embrace its case-by-case approach. Part II describes the principles of reasonableness found in the Restatement (Fourth), including customary international law’s “genuine connection” requirement, the presumption against extraterritoriality, and the principle of reasonableness in interpretation. Part III offers a brief evaluation of the different approaches to reasonableness, concluding that the Restatement (Fourth)’s provison-by-provision approach is preferable.

Keywords: reasonableness, foreign relations law, Section 403, genuine connection, presumption against extraterritoriality, reasonableness in interpretation, comity

Suggested Citation

Dodge, William S., Reasonableness in the Restatement (Fourth) of Foreign Relations Law (April 16, 2019). Willamette Law Review, Vol. 54 (2019), Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3373370

William S. Dodge (Contact Author)

University of California, Davis - School of Law ( email )

Martin Luther King, Jr. Hall
Davis, CA CA 95616-5201
United States

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
149
Abstract Views
827
Rank
357,561
PlumX Metrics