The assault on international law

"International law presents a conceptual riddle. Why comply with it when there is no world government to enforce it? The United States has a long history of skepticism towards international law, but 9/11 ushered in a particularly virulent phase of American exceptionalism. Torture became official government policy, President Bush denied that the Geneva Conventions applied to the war against al-Qaeda, and the US drifted away from international institutions like the International Criminal Court and the United Nations. Although American politicians and their legal advisors are often the public face of this attack, the root of this movement is a coordinated and deliberate attack by law professors hostile to its philosophical foundations, including Eric Posner, Jack Goldsmith, Adrian Vermeule, and John Yoo.

Machine generated contents note: -- PROLOGUE: DRAMATIS PERSONAE -- 1. The Office of Legal Counsel -- 2. The Emergence of the New Realists -- 3. Conclusion -- CHAPTER ONE: GAMING THE FEDERAL COURTS -- 1. The Erie Doctrine 2.0 -- 2. The Filartiga Era: Enforcing International Law at Home -- 3. Filartiga's Demise, Parochialism's Rise -- 4. The New Realists go to Washington -- 5. International Law as Interpretive Guidance -- 6. Conclusion -- CHAPTER TWO: PRESIDENTS AND LEVIATHANS -- 1. Public Opinion and Law -- 2. Presidential Power: The New Realist's Normative Argument -- 3. Democratic Decision-making versus Schmittology -- 4. Executive Action During Emergencies -- 5. Why Schmittian Administrative Law is Not Inevitable -- 6. Conclusion -- CHAPTER THREE: THE ATTACK: MISUNDERSTANDING RATIONALITY -- 1. The Game Theory Game -- 2. The Prisoner's Dilemma and Nash Equilibrium -- 3. Law and Self-Interest -- 4. Objections to the Moral Obligation of States -- CHAPTER FOUR: SOLVING THE PRISONER'S DILEMMA OF INTERNATIONAL LAW -- 1. The Toxin Puzzle and Taking the Long View -- 2. The Deterrence Paradox and the Limits of Follow-Through -- 3. Assurances and Cooperation -- 4. Why the New Realists Fai…