Also known as: Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties · Vienna Convention · Law of Treaties Convention
Written by attorneys — see sources below.
A multilateral treaty that codifies the customary international law rules governing the formation, validity, interpretation, amendment, and termination of treaties between states.
Earl seeks overtime pay from Republic Precision under an international labor agreement that the Senate ratified with an express non-self-executing declaration and that Congress never implemented. The President issues a memorandum ordering federal agencies to apply the agreement's standards in manufacturing disputes. The hearing officer rejects the claim because the agreement supplies no domestic rights that the agency may enforce.
After a Chilean court awards sole custody to the mother, the father removes the child to Texas. The mother petitions for return under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. The Court holds that the treaty's access rights qualify as rights of custody, triggering the return remedy.
Timothy Abbott, a British citizen, and Jacquelyn Abbott, a United States citizen, married in England in 1992. Their son A. J. A. was born in Hawaii in 1995 after the couple moved there for Mr. Abbott’s astronomy work. The family relocated to La Serena, Chile, in 2002, where marital discord led to separation in March 2003. Chilean courts granted the mother daily care and control of A. J. A. while awarding the father direct and regular visitation rights, including every other weekend and the full month of February each year. Under Minors Law 16,618, article 49, Chilean law conferred a ne exeat right on the father requiring his authorization before the child could leave the country. The mother obtained a ne exeat order from the Chilean family court prohibiting removal of the boy. In August 2005, while proceedings remained pending before the Chilean court, the mother removed A. J. A. from Chile to Texas without permission from the father or the court. A private investigator later located the mother and child in Texas. The mother filed for divorce in Texas state court in February 2006, seeking modification of the father’s rights including sole authority over the child’s residence. Mr. Abbott filed an action in Texas state court requesting visitation and an order to show cause why the child should not return to Chile. The state court denied return but granted liberal visitation periods in Texas during February 2006. In May 2006, Mr. Abbott filed suit in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas under the Hague Convention and the International Child Abduction Remedies Act seeking the child’s return to Chile. After a bench trial at which only Mr. Abbott testified, the District Court denied relief in July 2007. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed on the same rationale. The Supreme Court granted certiorari to resolve a conflict among the circuits on the status of ne exeat rights.
View caseA District of Columbia ordinance bars signs critical of foreign governments within 500 feet of an embassy. The Court invalidates the restriction because it targets speech based on content and cannot be justified by the asserted interest in protecting diplomatic dignity.
Petitioners Bridget M. Brooker, Michael Boos, and J. Michael Waller wished to display signs critical of the Governments of the Soviet Union and Nicaragua on the public sidewalks within 500 feet of the embassies of those Governments in Washington, D.C. Brooker and Boos planned to carry signs stating “RELEASE SAKHAROV” and “SOLIDARITY” in front of the Soviet Embassy. Waller intended to display a sign reading “STOP THE KILLING” within 500 feet of the Nicaraguan Embassy. All of the petitioners also wished to congregate with two or more other persons within 500 feet of official foreign buildings. Congress enacted D.C. Code § 22-1115 in 1938 pursuant to its authority under Article I, § 8, cl. 10, of the Constitution to define and punish offenses against the law of nations. The statute prohibits the display within 500 feet of a foreign embassy of any sign tending to bring a foreign government into public odium or disrepute. It also makes it unlawful to congregate within 500 feet of such a building and refuse to disperse after a police order to do so. Petitioners, together with respondent Father R. David Finzer, brought a facial First Amendment challenge to the statute in the District Court for the District of Columbia, naming the Mayor and other District law enforcement officials as defendants. The United States intervened as amicus curiae supporting the constitutionality of the statute. The District Court granted respondents’ motion for summary judgment. A divided panel of the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit affirmed in part. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.
View caseA self-executing treaty creates enforceable domestic rights without further legislation. A non-self-executing treaty requires implementing legislation before it has domestic legal effect. The distinction turns on whether the treaty language or Senate declaration indicates that Congress must act before courts or agencies may apply the treaty.
No. The President lacks independent constitutional authority to enforce a non-self-executing treaty by directing states or federal agencies to comply. Any attempt to do so violates separation of powers because only Congress can supply the missing domestic implementation.
The VCLT supplies rules for interpreting treaty text and determining whether a treaty is intended to be self-executing. U.S. courts still apply the Medellin framework to decide whether the treaty has domestic effect absent congressional action.
…of the intersection of the travel restriction in Article 49 of its Minors Law 16,618 and the Convention. : See Art. 32, Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, May 23, 1969, 1155 U. N. T. S. 331, 340 (“Recourse may be had to supplementary means of interpretation . . . when the interpretation . . . (a) leaves the meaning ambiguous or obscure; or…