Wisconsin International Law Journal

INTRODUCTION

“For the past thirty years, nonprofit organizations have revolutionized open space and habitat conservation in the United States through the use of conservation easements. Pursuant to  legislation, nonprofits may now acquire and hold perpetual restrictions that prevent alteration of the subject land’s natural and ecological features. These rights can be held “in gross,” with the result that the nonprofit need not own land near the restricted property and can be based in a distant location.

Based on this success, proponents in more recent years have advocated the export of “conservation easements” from the United States to other countries. A vehicle like a conservation easement, having some or even perhaps all of its attributes, could be employed in other countries to achieve various local and national conservation goals. My thesis, however, is that while conservation  easements could be a useful tool for preservation of land outside of the United States, they may not be the most effective or suitable framework to advance conservation in all countries. Rather than pushing for adoption of an American-style “conservation easement” elsewhere, other countries and American (and global) advocates of
conservation devices should engage in a process to determine a given country’s appropriate conservation toolbox. That process should be free of American legal and conservation jargon and without a predisposition for U.S. legal structures, values, and policy choices.  Each country must determine on its own whether private conservation restrictions meet its economic, social, and political realities and aspirations (many of which are quite different than the American experience reflected in U.S. conservation easements) and which attributes the device should have on key issues such as duration, in gross enforcement, role of government, etc. These national and local goals can then be given life by finding an appropriate legal structure, ideally consistent with the country’s own jurisprudence and system.

This article will provide a framework of the major policy and legal issues that could, and in my view should, inform a country’s decision to adopt private conservation restrictions. These include considerations of cost, efficiency, preference for private versus governmental actors, the benefits and costs of perpetual limits on land, public regulation of land as an alternative, the specter of neocolonialism in environmental controls, the nature and capacity of the country’s nonprofit sector, and the local legal system. Finally, the learning about conservation restrictions should be a two-way street, not just the export of American methods: the views of some other countries about governmental involvement in private conservation may teach valuable lessons to U.S. jurisdictions about the need for an increased role of government and the public in certain aspects of the selection, modification, and termination of some conservation easements. ”

For full article, see Volume 28, Issue 4

Image source: Trisha Akbeg

ABSTRACT

” After her substantive and procedural due process claims were dismissed in the U.S. Supreme Court, Jessica Gonzales took the unprecedented step of filing a claim with the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights.  Gonzales’s case has implicated two hot-button issues in modern U.S. jurisprudence: domestic violence prevention and the role of international law in domestic courts. Several scholars have looked at Gonzales’s case as it relates either to domestic violence or international law, but few have looked at the interplay between both issues. Specifically, academic discussion of the issue largely ignores how international law should be used to shift U.S. policy toward domestic violence prevention. This article suggests that U.S. courts should follow a model similar to that used in evaluating cruel and unusual punishment. For juvenile death penalty, the Supreme Court looked at emerging international consensus to help determine “evolving
standards of decency.”

This precedent, as well as other “law-related human questions” where international law has been used, ought to provide a model that courts should follow in domestic violence prevention. This model can be used to slowly shift U.S. law to be consistent with the international community in requiring the government to protect its citizens from domestic violence perpetrated by private actors. Such a policy would be consistent with ABA Standards for Criminal Justice, as it would uphold states’ mandatory enforcement statutes where they create a special relationship between citizens and the government—something that the Court overlooked in Gonzales’s case when it arguably misapplied these standards. This article suggests that by deciding to enforce statutes like the one at issue in Gonzales, the United States would take a small, but definitive, step towards bringing its domestic violence policies in line with modern standards of decency. ”

For full article, see Volume 28:3

Image source: U.S. Supreme Court, Mark Fischer, http-_www.flickr.com_photos_tom_ruaat_with_3609210136_

ABSTRACT

“A U.S. Congressman introduced legislation to create an International Sex Offender Registry based on the U.S. domestic Megan’s  Law. The introduction of an international sex offender registry should not independently originate from the United States or be based upon the flawed United States sex offender system. Instead, if the international community deems it necessary to have an international sex offender registry, it should be a global effort modeled after work in the European Union that embraces human rights to create a system that combines safety with privacy, rehabilitation and social reintegration.”

For full article, see Volume 28:3

Image source: EU Flag_Wave_by Rock Cohen, http-_www.flickr.com_photos_robdeman_2390666040_in_pool-creative-commons-eu#_photos_robdeman_2390666040_in_pool-1042925@N22_

ABSTRACT

“In late April of 2009, U.S. President Obama announced the government’s reorganization plan for Chrysler LLC (“Chrysler”), promising a “quick, efficient, and controlled” bankruptcy. 1 Despite these strong words, the bankruptcy plan necessitated an international solution whereby the Italian car company Fiat purchased a 20 percent interest in Chrysler, allowing the reorganization to move forward. This reorganization may create conflict of international proportions if the U.S. and Italian divisions diverge on a labor issue. This comment addresses Fiat’s partial acquisition of Chrysler, explores the legal processes surrounding the formation of the multi-national company, and ultimately argues that a U.S. administered, rules-based regulation should control labor law disputes.”

For full article, see Volume 28:3

Image source: Roman Forum,By Eustaquio Santimano, http-//www.flickr.com/photos/eustaquio/3189802601/sizes/m/in/photostream/

INTRODUCTION

The Article’s “working premise is that there is nothing inherently self- explanatory in terms such as the “Arab world” or “Middle East.” The term “Arab” is often used when authors intend to include notions of culture or language. “Middle East” was a political demarcation which came into general use when the British government established their “Middle East Command” during the Second World War. The purpose of my critical analysis is to examine how these reports impart their own regional images. By thus delineating each report’s geography, this article takes up the challenge set out by each development report by contributing various analytical tools that may help us better understand how to improve the lives of those individuals and communities living in the Arab/MENA region.”

For a full introduction and full article see, Volume 28:3

Image source: Mountains of MiddleEast, by Pranav_http-//www.flickr.com/photos/neychurluvr/5170724923/sizes/m/in/photostream/

ABSTRACT

“This comment is a review of the current body of law regarding outer space; more specifically, it analyzes the property rights that exist for states, corporations, and individuals on the moon, the planets, and the space between them. This article proposes that existing international space law is stifling the human exploration and development of outer space and that U.S. common law property law inspiration for a new property law for outer space.”

To download the full article, visit Volume 28:3

Image source: Space by Sweetie187, http-_www.flickr.com_photos_58782395@N03_5518992555_sizes_m_in_photostream_

To download a tentative schedule for the 2012 WILJ Symposium, click here.

A flyer is available here.

The schedule will be updated as additional speakers are confirmed.

We look forward to seeing you at the Symposium on March 23, 2012!

Wisconsin International Law Journal 2012 Symposium

Panel 3: Lessons from other countries

The 2012 Symposium’s third panel will look at the development of  renewable energies in other countries and regions in order to see what lessons can be learned by the  policymakers here. This panel will include a discussion of efforts in the European Union (particularly Germany and Denmark) and Brazil (sugar cane ethanol), as well as ongoing efforts to integrate the use of renewable energy into China and India.

The third panel will include the following speakers:

• Dr. Greg Nemet (UW La Follette School & Nelson Institute, moderator)
• Professor Tseming Yang
• David Cassuto (Pace Law School)
• Ram Mohan (The Energy & Resources Institute, New Delhi)
• Dave Trubek (University of Wisconsin Law School)

Wisconsin International Law Journal 2012 Symposium

Panel 2: Cross-cutting issues

The 2012 Symposium’s second panel will focus on cross-cutting issues impacting all countries. Topics include biofuels and food security, human and indigenous rights, intellectual property, and land tenure.

The second panel will include the following speakers:

• Steph Tai (University of Wisconsin Law School, moderator)
• Shalanda Baker (University of Wisconsin Law School)
• Sarah Tran (Southern Methodist University Law School)
• Holly Gibbs (University of Wisconsin-Madison)
• Kalli Murray (Marquette Law School)

Wisconsin International Law Journal 2012 Symposium

Panel 1: Renewable energy in the US

The 2012 Symposium’s first panel will discuss renewable energy in the United States.  Wisconsin and other states including California have made important strides in the development of renewable energy  in their respective states, but these states also face a number of challenges.

The first panel will include the following speakers:

• Peter Carstensen (UW Law School, moderator)
• Deborah Erwin (Wisconsin Public Service Commission)
• Steve Weissman (Berkeley Law)
• Melissa Powers (Lewis & Clark)
• Dr. Paul Wilson (UW Nuclear Engineering)