University of Virginia Legal Working Paper Series
University of Virginia Public Law and Legal Theory Working Paper Series
What Story Got Wrong - Federalism, Localist Opportunism and International Law
Article comments
Forthcoming: 72 Missouri Law Review (2008)
Abstract
In Swift v. Tyson, Justice Story argued that federalization of the law of negotiable instruments was necessary to thwart local courts from adopting rules that favored local interests at the expense of national welfare. Variations of this argument have been embraced by modern proponents of federalizing many aspects of international law, including customary international law. The argument proves too much, and fails to take account conditions where local decisionmakers have an incentive to reach globally optimal outcomes. The law of negotiable instruments illustrates this point: State law now occupies this field but, contrary to Story’s concern, the law in the United States is uniform and stable. Two international conventions currently under negotiation, the Hague Child Support Convention and the UNCITRAL Electronic Commerce Convention, provide further examples of cooperation without mandatory federal oversight.
Subject Area
International Law, Public Law and Legal Theory
Recommended Citation
Paul B. Stephan,
"What Story Got Wrong - Federalism, Localist Opportunism and International Law"
(October 2008).
University of Virginia Legal Working Paper Series.
University of Virginia Public Law and Legal Theory Working Paper Series.
Working Paper 110.
http://law.bepress.com/uvalwps/uva_publiclaw/art110
No readers' reactions have been posted for this article. To submit one, copy the URL for this article (http://law.bepress.com/uvalwps/uva_publiclaw/art110) and click here.