THE INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE - AN ANALYSIS OF THE UNITED STATES’, THE UNITED KINGDOM’S, AND SPAIN’S USE OF FOREIGN LAW
PublisherThe University of Arizona.
RightsCopyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.
AbstractThis thesis examines how the United States, particularly its courts, treats foreign law as compared to the practices of other nations. Throughout various political actors within the United States legal system, there is extreme divergence of attitudes towards foreign legal systems. In particular, it has become obvious throughout recent years that varying justices on the United States Supreme Court highly disagree over the implementation of foreign law as a means of precedent. The degree of foreign law implementation varies across international relations, which further highlights the key differences within the common and civil law systems. This paper begins with an analysis of the United States judicial system, and describes how the structure of our courts and legal system in its entirety, in addition to various historical considerations, impact our adoption of international concepts and foreign law. Next, specific United States Supreme Court Justices are highlighted, all of whom have contributed to how our nation has perceived and perhaps implemented foreign law over time. Then, this discussion of foreign law is related to the basic differences between civil and common law systems. This paper assesses another common law country (the United Kingdom), and a civil law country (Spain). Finally, these legal systems are evaluated and practical considerations are assessed.