Print
Essay
24.1
International Law, Constitutions, and Electoral Content Moderation: Overcoming Supranational Failures Through Domestic Solutions
Emilio Peluso Neder Meyer
Federal University of Minas Gerais, Brazil; National Council for Scientific and Technological Development, Brazil.
Fabrício Bertini Pasquot Polido
Federal University of Minas Gerais, Brazil.

Relying on a comparison between the cases of Brazil and the U.S. (both facing recent democratic erosion), this Essay shows how Brazilian courts responded to challenges to democracy and how, in the U.S., content moderation generally depends on private actors.

Print
Essay
24.1
The Digital Services Act and the Brussels Effect on Platform Content Moderation
Dawn Carla Nunziato
The Pedas Family Endowed Professor of Intellectual Property and Technology Law, The George Washington University Law School.

I am extremely grateful to David Markallo, Garrett Dowell, and Ken Rodriguez for their excellent and expert research and librarian assistance in connection with this Article. I am also very grateful to Todd Peterson for his insightful comments on this draft and to the editors at the Chicago Journal of International Law, especially Tori Keller, Miriam Kohn, and Michael Antosiewicz.

The EU’s latest regulation of social media platforms—the Digital Services Act (DSA)—will create tension and conflict with the U.S. speech regime applicable to social media platforms. The DSA, like prior EU regulations of social media platforms, will further instantiate the Brussels Effect, whereby EU regulators wield powerful influence on how social media platforms moderate content on the global scale.

Print
Essay
24.1
The Digital Services Act and the EU as the Global Regulator of the Internet
Ioanna Tourkochoriti
Associate Professor of Law, Baltimore Law School.

I am grateful to Martha Larson (Professor in Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, Language & Communication at Radboud University in the Netherlands) for the reflections and bibliographical suggestions related to the state of the art in artificial intelligence and machine learning in detecting misinformation. I was able to elaborate legal commentary of the state of the art following fascinating conversations with Martha. I am also grateful to Eric Heinze, Jörn Reinhardt, Kristian Skagen Ekeli, Jan-Willem van Prooijen, and the participants of the symposium organized by the Chicago Journal of International Law on free speech for interesting discussions. Special thanks to Tori Keller, Christian Pierre-Canel, and Mike Antosiewicz, editors with the Chicago Journal of International Law, for excellent editing suggestions.

This Essay discusses the Digital Services Act, the new regulation enacted by the EU to combat hate speech and misinformation online, focusing on the major challenges its application will entail.

Print
Essay
24.1
The Recent Free Expression Jurisprudence of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention
Arthur Traldi
Arthur Traldi is an adjunct professor at Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law and at European University-Viadrina.

The author thanks Tori Keller, Sraavya Poonuganti, McKenna Gilliland, and Matthew Gillett for their thoughts and suggestions. Any errors are the author’s alone.

The WGAD can serve as a critical forum for protecting free expression—particularly for individuals whose free expression rights may be violated by states not parties to the ICCPR or its Optional Protocol I. This Essay describes the contributions of the WGAD’s recent free speech jurisprudence to the understanding of protected free expression in international law.

Print
Essay
24.1
The Right to Be Forgotten: Google Spain as a Benchmark for Free Speech versus Privacy?
Kyu Ho Youm
Jonathan Marshall First Amendment Chair and Professor, University of Oregon School of Journalism and Communication.

The authors express their profound thanks to Dr. Hawley Johnson, Associate Director of Columbia Global Freedom of Expression, for facilitating access to the global RTBF case law archive and related resources for RTBF research.

Ahran Park
Assistant Professor, Korea University School of Media and Communication.

The authors express their profound thanks to Dr. Hawley Johnson, Associate Director of Columbia Global Freedom of Expression, for facilitating access to the global RTBF case law archive and related resources for RTBF research.

Since the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled in Google Spain in 2014, the global legal discourse on the “right to be forgotten” (RTBF) has accelerated the RTBF’s establishment as a right to informational privacy. But international courts have varied in their interpretations and applications of the RTBF, with some embracing it and others being wary of balancing the right with freedom of expression.

Print
Article
23.2
Hiding in Plain Sight: An ILO Convention on Labor Standards in Global Supply Chains
James J. Brudney
Joseph Crowley Chair in Labor and Employment Law, Fordham Law School.

Thanks to William Alford, Kate Andrias, Aditi Bagchi, Janice Bellace, Martha Chamallas, Colin Fenwick, Jennifer Gordon, Desiree LeClercq, Kamala Sankaran, Lee Swepston, Bernd Waas, and Benjamin Zipursky for valuable comments and suggestions at different stages of this project; to Janet Kearney for superb research assistance; and to Fordham Law School for generous financial support. The author is a member of the International Labor Organization Committee of Experts, but this Article is presented solely in his individual capacity as a law professor. It does not reflect the views of the Committee or the ILO.

This Article proposes a solution to the primary challenge currently confronting governments, employers, and workers under international labor law: how to promote and protect decent labor conditions in global supply chains.

Print
Article
23.2
Discursive Constitutionalism
Ngoc Son Bui
Professor of Asian Laws, Faculty of Law, University of Oxford.

Many thanks to Timothy Endicott, Tom Ginsburg, Tarun Khaitan, Genki Kimura, Han Liu, Koichi Nakano, and participants of the Oxford Faculty Research Seminar for their useful comments.

This Article develops the concept of discursive constitutionalism, defined as the construction of constitutionalism through public discourse.

Print
Article
23.2
Accounting for the Selfish State: Human Rights, Reproductive Equality, and Global Regulation of Gestational Surrogacy
Claudia Flores
Clinical Professor of Law, Yale Law School.

This paper was presented at a faculty workshop at Yale Law School in March 2022. As such, it benefitted from insight, comments, and suggestions from workshop attendants. Special thanks to Doug NeJaime, Judith Resnik, Amy Kapzynski, Oona Hathaway, Michael Wishnie, Jim Silk and Mindy Roseman for conversation and suggestions. Thanks, as well, to Tom Ginsburg for thought-provoking discussions on surrogacy in the course of producing Episode 5 in Season 1 of the Entitled Podcast. Past collaborations with the U.N. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Center for Reproductive Rights served as a critical background to this work. I’m grateful to Carol Kim, Maggie Niu, Elizabeth Lindberg, Sophie Desch, and Simone Gewirth for excellent research and editing assistance. A final thanks to the student research team of the University of Chicago Law School Global Human Rights Clinic (Kelly Geddes, Marcela Barba, Marie Umbach, and Alexa Rollins) who were partners in the fact-finding in Cambodia and the interviews of A, C, and K.

This Article argues that state responses to surrogacy raise serious questions about the state’s discretion to cabin and eliminate reproductive choice and autonomy. True global enjoyment of human rights depends now, and will depend more and more, on how states respond to transnational human rights challenges like that of surrogacy; state cooperation across borders is and will become increasingly necessary to satisfy treaty commitments involving equal and full realization of fundamental rights.

Print
Comment
23.2
Applying Derivative United Nations Immunity to Humanitarian NGOs
Tori Keller
B.A. 2017, Stanford University; J.D. Candidate 2023, The University of Chicago Law School.

I would like to thank the board and staff of the Chicago Journal of International Law for their constant guidance and support and Professor Eric Posner for his insightful feedback.

This Comment assesses the bases for U.N. immunity and the similar concept of derivative sovereign immunity, whereby sovereign governments extend their immunity to quasi-government entities and private contractors. It argues that derivative immunity from states is based on a principal-agent relationship and that this relationship may be found in some U.N.-NGO partnerships.

Print
Comment
23.2
It’s Raining Rockets: Heightening State Liability for Space Pollution
Sraavya Poonuganti
J.D. Candidate, 2023, University of Chicago Law School; B.A., 2019, College of William & Mary.

First, I would like to thank the entire editorial board and staff of the Chicago Journal of International Law for their assistance and feedback in refining this Comment. Second, I would like to thank Professor Lee Fennell for her invaluable mentorship and guidance in writing this piece. Finally, I would like to thank my family and friends for their endless love and support.

This Comment proposes a novel solution to establish a security deposit program that participating spacefaring nations must pay into in order to launch objects and satellites into outer space, modeled after existing international environmental law efforts to solve the issue of marine debris.

Print
Comment
23.1
WIPO’s Proposed Treatment of Sacred Traditional Cultural Expressions as a Distinct Form of Intellectual Property
Alberto Vargas
J.D. Candidate, 2023.

First, I would like to thank the Chicago Journal of International Law staff and editorial board for their help refining this Comment. Second, I would like to thank Professor Adam Chilton for serving as my faculty advisor on this Comment. Finally, I would like to thank my family for their love and support.

The U.N. World Intellectual Property Organization's recent Draft Articles propose a tiered rights system in which the owners of sacred traditional cultural expressions (TCEs) receive more protective rights than the owners of secular TCEs. While the instinct to protect the intellectual property of indigenous groups is admirable in light of indigenous groups’ exploitation and exclusion from Western intellectual property regimes, a protection system that all nations accept has been difficult to reach. Even more so, a system that differentiates among TCEs based on their sacredness will need to be justified to convince as many nations as possible (or at least a critical mass of nations that heavily influence international intellectual property policy) to adopt WIPO’s proposed system. This Comment explores potential justifications for the Draft Provisions’ sacred versus secular distinction.

Print
Comment
23.1
Clearview AI, TikTok, and the Collection of Facial Images in International Law
Miriam Kohn
BA 2017, University of Rochester; JD Candidate, 2023, The University of Chicago Law School.

I would like to thank Professor Richard McAdams, Rachel Katzin, and Joshua Fox for their editorial guidance; Christopher Perkins for his explanation of the technical details of hash values; Professor James Hathaway, Professor Benedict Kingsbury, Navya Dasari, Helena von Nagy, Theresa Oliver, Diana Kenealy, Rebecca Jin, Julia Krusen, and Mason Pazhwak for their feedback through the 2022 Salzburg Lloyd N. Cutler Fellowship; and the entire editorial board and staff of the Chicago Journal of International Law for their invaluable assistance throughout the publication process.

Private companies’ collection of facial images is on the rise globally, which has major implications for both economic development and privacy laws. This Comment uses the facial recognition technology company Clearview AI and the video sharing app TikTok as case studies to examine the problems raised by these practices.