{"title":"错误的悲喜剧侵蚀了条约的自我执行:麦德林诉德克萨斯州及其后","authors":"J. Quigley","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2080130","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In Medellin v. Texas (2008), the U.S. Supreme Court further mystified the already ambiguous doctrine of self-execution of treaty provisions that create rights for individuals. Lower court self-execution decisions since Medellin suggest that, at least in certain classes of cases, the potentially broad language in Medellin that appears to restrict self-execution is being ignored.","PeriodicalId":80896,"journal":{"name":"Case Western Reserve journal of international law","volume":"45 1","pages":"403"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Tragi-Comedy of Errors Erodes Self-Execution of Treaties: Medellin v. Texas and Beyond\",\"authors\":\"J. Quigley\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.2080130\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In Medellin v. Texas (2008), the U.S. Supreme Court further mystified the already ambiguous doctrine of self-execution of treaty provisions that create rights for individuals. Lower court self-execution decisions since Medellin suggest that, at least in certain classes of cases, the potentially broad language in Medellin that appears to restrict self-execution is being ignored.\",\"PeriodicalId\":80896,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Case Western Reserve journal of international law\",\"volume\":\"45 1\",\"pages\":\"403\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-06-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Case Western Reserve journal of international law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2080130\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Case Western Reserve journal of international law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2080130","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
A Tragi-Comedy of Errors Erodes Self-Execution of Treaties: Medellin v. Texas and Beyond
In Medellin v. Texas (2008), the U.S. Supreme Court further mystified the already ambiguous doctrine of self-execution of treaty provisions that create rights for individuals. Lower court self-execution decisions since Medellin suggest that, at least in certain classes of cases, the potentially broad language in Medellin that appears to restrict self-execution is being ignored.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
