International Law

There is a huge bibliography on international law, which has a long history. I suggest WAISers at least read an article on it. It is taught in law schools around the world. Despite this, even some WAISers say it does not exist. This seems to be an expression of the mentality which has led the US to reject agreements which are accepted by all the West European powers. The impression is getting around that the US thinks it is above the law. Here is a message from lawyer Rob Gaudet. This will end at least for the present our debate on the subject, the naysayers having been given ample opportunity to express themselves. Rob says:

"In all three years of law school, I never once heard of the "True Law" pronounced by Tom Grey. It sounds like a variation upon "Natural Law" which, unfortunately, went out of vogue decades ago. I think Tom Grey's theory of "True Law" is interesting, but it is not a traditional part of the law school curriculum. The law does not require the use of overwhelming executive force. Many laws serve nothing more than a normative or expressive purpose. For example, laws permitting the civil bonding (but not, per se, "marriage") of gay couples are nothing more than a symbolic affirmation of the commitment between two gay people. These unions are not enforced in the same manner as marriage but they are, nonetheless, part of the law.

Saying that the law is the application of brute force sounds far too mechanical. In point of fact, the law exists even when it is not enforced. Brown v. Board of Education was good law even when many local school districts refused to obey the decision. It took decades to enforce the decision in specific localities, but the law written in Brown v. Board was not defunct during the interim. It was the law of the land. Honestly, I'm not sure what Tom Grey is getting at with his proclamation of 'True Law' and his insistence that the law is nothing more than brute force".

Nothing more on this subject for the time being.

Ronald Hilton - 8/14/02