Foreign Sovereign Immunity and Domestic Officer Suits

The Green Bag Pub Date : 2009-11-23 DOI:10.2139/SSRN.1511894
C. Bradley, J. Goldsmith
{"title":"Foreign Sovereign Immunity and Domestic Officer Suits","authors":"C. Bradley, J. Goldsmith","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1511894","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Under international law, official-capacity suits brought against a foreign state’s officers are treated as suits against the state itself and thus as subject to the state’s immunity, even in suits alleging human rights abuses. This immunity regime differs from the immunity regime that applies in the United States in suits brought against state and federal officials for violations of federal law. Despite the federal government’s sovereign immunity and the immunity of state governments under Eleventh Amendment jurisprudence, courts often allow suits against federal and state officers for their official actions. This essay attempts to explain why the immunity rules differ between the two regimes. We begin by showing that the differential treatment of foreign and domestic officer suits has deep roots in British and American common law. We then show that Congress has not acted to alter this common law backdrop, and we explain the significance of this fact. Finally, we discuss functional reasons for the long-time differential treatment of suits against domestic and foreign officials.","PeriodicalId":245319,"journal":{"name":"The Green Bag","volume":"78 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Green Bag","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1511894","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Under international law, official-capacity suits brought against a foreign state’s officers are treated as suits against the state itself and thus as subject to the state’s immunity, even in suits alleging human rights abuses. This immunity regime differs from the immunity regime that applies in the United States in suits brought against state and federal officials for violations of federal law. Despite the federal government’s sovereign immunity and the immunity of state governments under Eleventh Amendment jurisprudence, courts often allow suits against federal and state officers for their official actions. This essay attempts to explain why the immunity rules differ between the two regimes. We begin by showing that the differential treatment of foreign and domestic officer suits has deep roots in British and American common law. We then show that Congress has not acted to alter this common law backdrop, and we explain the significance of this fact. Finally, we discuss functional reasons for the long-time differential treatment of suits against domestic and foreign officials.
外国主权豁免和国内官员诉讼
根据国际法,对外国官员提起的公职资格诉讼被视为对国家本身提起的诉讼,因此受到国家豁免的约束,即使在指控侵犯人权的诉讼中也是如此。这一豁免制度不同于在美国针对州和联邦官员违反联邦法律提起的诉讼中适用的豁免制度。尽管根据《第十一修正案》的判例,联邦政府享有主权豁免,州政府享有豁免,但法院通常允许对联邦和州官员的官方行为提起诉讼。本文试图解释为什么两种制度的豁免规则不同。我们首先表明,对外国和国内官员诉讼的区别对待在英美普通法中有着深刻的根源。然后,我们表明国会没有采取行动改变这种普通法背景,我们解释了这一事实的重要性。最后,我们讨论了长期以来对国内外官员诉讼区别对待的功能原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信