Document Type
Article
Disciplines
International Law
Abstract
The act of state doctrine is a judicially-created rule of decision that precludes United States courts from questioning the validity of foreign sovereign acts. The doctrine has also been interpreted to preclude inquiry into the motivations behind sovereign acts, on the theory that such inquiry would inevitably impugn the validity of those acts. In W.S. Kirkpatrick & Co., Inc. v. Environmental Tectonics Corp., Int'l,' the United States Supreme Court held that cases requiring inquiry into sovereign motivations should not be precluded by the act of state doctrine.
This note first reviews the history and various considerations underlying the act of state doctrine. Second, the note relates the factual background and rationale of the Kirkpatrick opinion. Third, the note analyzes the reasoning of the opinion, and compares the alternative bases of decision that were available to the Court. Finally, the note evaluates the implications of the Kirkpatrick decision for the future of the act of state doctrine, and concludes that the Court created a more principled doctrine, but did so through unprincipled means.
Recommended Citation
Nolan, Jeffrey N., "An Unprincipled Search for Principle in the Act of State Doctrine: W.S. Kirkpatrick & Co., Inc. v. Environmental Tectonics Corp, Int'l" (1991). Connecticut Journal of International Law. 143.
https://digitalcommons.lib.uconn.edu/cjil/143
Accessibility Requirements
1