The Act of State Doctrine--From Abstention to Activism

Neil Kleinman
Abstract:A distinctive attribute of the U.S. federal courts is their power to define and limit their own authority [1]. The act of state doctrine is one expression of this power, used by the courts to limit their authority in matters involving foreign governments [2]. While differences in interpretation and application persist, the doctrine may be simply defined: U.S. courts may not inquire into the validity of the laws of other governments and their acts performed within their territories [3]. In some instances, the state or a closely related administrative or commercial entity of the state [41 is the litigant claiming act of state protection. Where neither the state [5] nor one directly related to the state claims protection [6]. application of the doctrine rests on the theory that the alleged culpability was the result of state action [7] that cannot or should not be examined under the doctrine. Thus, the act of state doctrine also effectively bars actions against private parties who are able to establish that their acts were required by the state [8]. The doctrine is interwoven with statements of respect for the independence owed every sovereign state [9], but it is more an expression of "the basic relationships between branches of government in a system of separation of powers" [10]. Hence, the doctrine may be said to incorporate [11] the "horizontal" character of international law, in which "there is no adequate 'higher law' available to resolve serious disputes between states", and the "vertical" character of a "federal state", in which there is a "structure ... [of law] ... effective to overcome most conflicts that arise within it" [12]. This article argues that since the Supreme Court's 1964 decision in Banco Nacional de Cuba v. Sabbatino, the act of state doctrine has neither been interpreted nor applied consistently by U.S. courts [131. The scope of the act of state doctrine has been seriously questioned [14]. Courts have varied sharply on its application to cases involving economic disputes and government-operated commercial enterprises [15]. Disagreement may spring from the fact that the
Political Science,Law
What problem does this paper attempt to address?