Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T20:05:07.894Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

8 - The Role of Ethics in U.S. Private International Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 December 2011

Donald Earl Childress, III
Affiliation:
Pepperdine University School of Law
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Globalization presents many difficult issues for United States courts faced with transnational legal problems. Chief among them is the fact that courts are not only called on to make complex decisions regarding the application of domestic law to transnational facts (a variation of the usual practice of a court in domestic cases), but are also tasked with making decisions regarding what effect, if any, foreign normative commitments (otherwise known as foreign law) are to be given in a domestic forum. Put more directly and concretely: In a case in which a United States court is asked to apply a foreign rule of law that is contrary to or conflicts with forum policies, what rule should be given effect – one chosen by the parties, one chosen by conflict-of-law standards, or one that the forum has articulated as just? In such situations, is a forum court obligated to apply forum law, in deference to the forum policies that animate that court's existence (such as the United States Constitution or local law), or is it free to apply some other law (whether foreign, chosen by the parties, or international) that takes account of the important international and party interests at stake in the court's decision?

Resolving this quandary raises questions that implicate the ethical dimension in law because a court must balance conflicting community norms – an “ethos” expressed in law – and determine which should govern. In making this choice, a court engages in ethical decision making by evaluating in a comparative fashion which laws or rules should guide it and choosing which laws effectuate the good in instant, fact-bound cases. By articulating what law should be applied based on rules of law to a given legal dispute, a court is an ethical decision maker – certainly not the only one or even the primary one, but one nonetheless. This is so because “the question ‘how should we organize our offices?’ cannot be answered in isolation from a discussion of the more basic question, ‘how is it best to live?’”

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Raz, JosephPractical Reason and NormsLondonOxford 1975Google Scholar
Raz, JosephThe Authority of LawOxfordOxford 1979Google Scholar
Wilhelm, GeorgHegel, FriedrichThe Phenomenology of SpiritMiller, A.OxfordOxford 1977 266Google Scholar
Cohen, FelixThe Ethical Basis of Legal CriticismYale Law Journal 41 1931CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, Walter W.Scientific Method and the LawAmerican Bar Association Journal 13 1927Google Scholar
Green, Michael StevenLegal Realism as Theory of LawWilliam and Mary Law Review 46 2005Google Scholar
Monaghan, Henry P.Constitutional Fact ReviewColumbia Law Review 85 1985 236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kraut, RichardAristotle: Political PhilosophyOxfordOxford 2002Google Scholar
Aristotle, The Nicomachean EthicsRoss, DavidBrown, LesleyOxfordOxford 2009Google Scholar
Clermont, Kevin M.Eisenberg, TheodoreXenophilia or Xenophobia in U.S. Courts? Before and after 9/11Journal of Empirical Legal Studies 4 2007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whytock, Christopher A.Myth of Mess? International Choice of Law in ActionNew York University Law Review 84 2009Google Scholar
Whytock, Christopher A.Domestic Courts and Global GovernanceTulane Law Review 84 2009Google Scholar
1997
2001
Currie, BrainerdThe Disinterested Third StateLaw and Contemporary Problems 1963 357Google Scholar
O’Hara, A.Ribstein, Larry E.From Politics to Efficiency in Choice of LawUniversity of Chicago Law Review 67 2000Google Scholar
Laycock, DouglasEqual Citizens of Equal and Territorial States: The Constitutional Foundations of Choice of LawColumbia Law Review 92 1992CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1981
1979
Scelle, G.Annuaire de L’Institut International de Droit PublicParisLes Presses Universitaires de France 1935Google Scholar
Scoles, Eugene F.Conflict of LawsEagan, MNWest 2004Google Scholar
Beale, Joseph H.A Treatise on the Conflict of LawsNew YorkBaker, Voorhis 1935Google Scholar
Currie, BrainerdSelected Essays on the Conflicts of LawsDurham, NCDuke University Press 1963Google Scholar
Dicey, A. V.Morris, J. H. C.The Conflict of LawsLondonStevens & Sons 1987Google Scholar
1971
1918
Berman, Paul SchiffTowards a Cosmopolitan Vision of Conflict of Laws: Redefining Governmental Interests in a Global EraUniversity of Pennsylvania Law Review 153 2005 1819CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berman, Paul SchiffConflict of Laws, Globalization, and Cosmopolitan PluralismWayne Law Review 51 2005Google Scholar
Cotterrell, Roger M.The Politics of JurisprudenceLondonButterworth 1989Google Scholar
Katzenbach, Nicholas de BellevilleConflicts on an Unruly Horse: Reciprocal Claims and Tolerances in Interstate and International LawYale Law Journal 65 1956Google Scholar
Alexander, LarryConstrained by PrecedentSouthern California Law Review 63 1989Google Scholar
Schauer, FrederickPrecedentStanford Law Review 39 1987CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Postema, Gerald J.Rome Roots of Our Notion of PrecedentGoldstein, LaurencePrecedent in LawOxfordClarendon 1987Google Scholar
Cohen, Felix S.Modern Ethics and the LawBrooklyn Law Review 4 1934Google Scholar
Eisenberg, Melvin AronThe Nature of the Common LawCambridge, MAHarvard 1988 16Google Scholar
Cardozo, BenjaminThe Growth of the LawNew Haven, CTYale 1924 61Google Scholar
Levi, EdwardAn Introduction to Legal ReasoningChicagoUniversity of Chicago 1993Google Scholar
Moore, Michael S.Precedent, Induction, and Ethical GeneralizationGoldstein, LaurencePrecedent in LawOxfordOxford 1986Google Scholar
Holmes, Oliver WendellThe Common LawHowe, Mark DeWolfeCambridge, MAHarvard 1961Google Scholar
Stone, Harlan F.The Common Law in the United StatesHarvard Law Review 50 1936CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sunstein, Cass R.Legal Reasoning and Political ConflictOxfordOxford 1996 75Google Scholar
Nussbaum, ArthurPublic Policy and the Political Crisis in the Conflict of LawsYale Law Journal 49 1940CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pound, RoscoeLaw and MoralsBostonMarshall Jones 1924 77Google Scholar
Winfield, PercyEthics in English in English Case LawHarvard Law Review 45 1931CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, H. L. A.The Concept of LawOxfordClarendon 1961 123Google Scholar
Dworkin, RonaldTaking Rights SeriouslyCambridge, MAHarvard 1978Google Scholar
Raz, J.The Authority of Law: Essays on Law and MoralityOxfordOxford 1979CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lobban, MichaelThe Common Law and English Jurisprudence 1760–1850OxfordClarendon 1991Google Scholar
Cardozo, The Growth of the LawNew Haven, CTYale 1924 61Google Scholar
Pollock, Essays in Jurisprudence and EthicsLondonMacmillan 1882 278Google Scholar
Zipursky, Benjamin C.Pragmatic ConceptualismLegal Theory 6 2000Google Scholar
Newmyer, R. KentSupreme Court Justice Joseph Story: Statesman of the Old RepublicChapel HillUniversity of North Carolina Press 1985Google Scholar
Paul, Joel R.Comity in International LawHarvard International Law Journal 32 1991Google Scholar
Richman, William M.Reynolds, William L.Understanding Conflict of LawsAlbany, NYMatthew Bender 1993Google Scholar
Childress, Donald EarlComity as Conflict: Resituating International Comity as Conflict of LawsU.C. Davis Law Review 44 2010Google Scholar
Symeonides, Symeon C.The First Conflicts Restatement through the Eyes of the Old: As Bad as Its ReputationSouthern Illinois University Law Journal 32 2007Google Scholar
Kegel, The Crisis of Conflict of LawsRecueil des Cours 112 1964 184Google Scholar
Cavers, DavidA Critique of the Choice of Law ProblemHarvard Law Review 47 1933 180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lorenzen, Ernest G.Territoriality, Public Policy, and the Conflict of LawsYale Law Journal 33 1924 744CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cavers, DavidA Critique of the Choice of Law ProblemHarvard Law Review 47 1933
Brilmayer, LeaInterest Analysis and the Myth of Legislative IntentMichigan Law Review 78 1980CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brilmayer, LeaConflict of Laws: Foundations and Future DirectionsNew YorkLittle, Brown 1991Google Scholar
Fawcett, J. J.Is American Governmental Interest Analysis the Solution to English Tort Choice of Law Problems?International and Comparative Law Quarterly 31 1982CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cavers, David F.A Critique of the Choice of Law ProblemHarvard Law Review 47 1933CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leflar, Robert A.Choice-Influencing Considerations in Conflicts LawNew York University Law Review 41 1966Google Scholar
Leflar, Robert A.Conflicts of Law: More on Choice-Influencing ConsiderationsCalifornia Law Review 54 1966CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weintraub, Russell J.Commentary on the Conflict of LawsMineola, NYFoundation Press 1986Google Scholar
McDougal, Luther M.Towards the Application of the Best Rule of Law in Choice of Law CasesMercer Law Review 35 1984Google Scholar
Juenger, Friedrich K.Choice of Law and Multistate JusticeNew YorkTransnational 2005Google Scholar
Symeonides, Symeon C.American Private International LawAlphen aan den Rijn, the NetherlandsKluwer Law International 2008Google Scholar
Singer, Joseph WilliamReal ConflictsBoston University Law Review 69 1989Google Scholar
Wilkinson, J. HarvieThe Dual Lives of Rights: The Rhetoric and Practice of Rights in AmericaCalifornia Law Review 98 2010Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×