The ambivalent shadow of the pre-Wilsonian rise of international law

The generation of American international lawyers who founded the American Society of International Law in 1906 and nurtured the soil for what has been retrospectively called a “moralistic legalistic approach to international relations” remains little studied. A survey of the rise of international legal literature in the U.S. from the mid-19th century to the eve of the Great War serves as a backdrop to the examination of the boosting effect on international law of the Spanish American War in 1898. An examination of the Insular Cases before the US Supreme Court is then accompanied by the analysis of a number of influential factors behind the pre-war rise of international law in the U.S. The work concludes with an examination of the rise of natural law doctrines in international law during the interwar period and the critiques addressed.by the realist founders of the field of “international relations” to the “moralistic legalistic approach to international relation

C. L. R. James and the Race/Class Question

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/68599/2/10.1177_030639687201400204.pd

The Chagos Islands cases: the empire strikes back

Good governance requires the accommodation of multiple interests in the cause of decision making. However, undue regard for particular sectional interests can take their toll upon public faith in government administration. Historically, broad conceptions of the good of the commonwealth were employed to outweigh the interests of groups that resisted colonisation. In the decision making of the British Empire, the standard approach for justifying the marginalisation of the interests of colonised groups was that they were uncivilised and that particular hardships were the price to be paid for bringing to them the imperial dividend of industrial society. It is widely assumed that with the dismantling of the British Empire, such impulses and their accompanying jurisprudence became a thing of the past. Even as decolonisation proceeded apace after the Second World War, however, the United Kingdom maintained control of strategically important islands with a view towards sustaining its global role. In an infamous example from this twilight period of empire, in the 1960s imperial interests were used to justify the expulsion of the Chagos islanders from the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT). Into the twenty-first century, this forced elision of the UK’s interests with the imperial “common good” continues to take centre stage in courtroom battles over the islanders’ rights, being cited before domestic and international tribunals in order to maintain the Chagossians’ exclusion from their homeland. This article considers the new jurisprudence of imperialism which has emerged in a string of decisions which have continued to marginalise the Chagossians’ interests

The response of a neutral atom to a strong laser field probed by transient absorption near the ionisation threshold

We present transient absorption spectra of an extreme ultraviolet attosecond pulse train in helium dressed by an 800 nm laser field with intensity ranging from $2times10^{12}$ W/cm$^2$ to $2times10^{14}$ W/cm$^2$. The energy range probed spans 16-42 eV, straddling the first ionisation energy of helium (24.59 eV). By changing the relative polarisation of the dressing field with respect to the attosecond pulse train polarisation we observe a large change in the modulation of the absorption reflecting the vectorial response to the dressing field. With parallel polarized dressing and probing fields, we observe significant modulations with periods of one half and one quarter of the dressing field period. With perpendicularly polarized dressing and probing fields, the modulations of the harmonics above the ionisation threshold are significantly suppressed. A full-dimensionality solution of the single-atom time-dependent Schr odinger equation obtained using the recently developed ab-initio time-dependent B-spline ADC method reproduce some of our observations

Justice Stevens and Constitutional Adjudication: The Law Beyond the Rules

This Article considers Justice Stevens’ approach to equal protection and free speech cases. It contrasts his longstanding attempts to pierce through mediating doctrinal rules in these areas and apply true constitutional meaning (“the law beyond the rules”) with the more rule-bound approach exemplified by Chief Justice Roberts and other members of the Court’s conservative bloc. While appreciating JusticeStevens’ efforts in this regard, this Article also recognizes some of the problems he encountered in his quest. However, it also notes that the more rule-bound approach suffers from flaws of its own, even when judged against the criteria more rule-friendly justices offer to evaluate a given method of constitutional adjudication. Thus, whatever one might think of the ultimate success of Justice Stevens’ project, it is surely the case that the more rule-bound approach has not proven its clear superiority