About CJIL Online
CJIL Online is the official digital-only imprint of the Chicago Journal of International Law. Established in 2021, CJIL Online furthers the Journal’s mission by highlighting particularly timely, dynamic, and cutting-edge developments in international and comparative law. CJIL Online also strives to be as accessible as possible—both for readers and academics seeking to publish. We review submissions on a year-round, rolling basis and consider a wide range of manuscripts, from shorter Essays to traditional Articles. CJIL Online upholds the Journal’s long-standing values of intellectual curiosity, rigor, and professionalism.
This Comment analyzes the range of ways that constitutions tend to incorporate human rights. It argues that the success of the method of incorporation of human rights conventions into constitutions does not produce the results one would expect, but hinges on whether the construction is able to strike a balance between ensuring that the judiciary implements international human rights standards while still leaving the judiciary with meaningful independence and agency.
Family influencer and parent-facilitated child influencer content has gained popularity and many parents are making significant money by sharing content featuring their children. This Comment assesses the potential dangers that arise from sharing a child’s personal information on a public forum and how the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) can be utilized to protect the children of family influencers from exploitation on social media.
This Article discusses the development of the modern legal consequences of surrender under the law of armed conflict and explores how technologically enabled surrender is being used in Ukraine. It concludes with an analysis of the impact of these technologies on the surrender process and presents an adaptive interpretation of existing norms, leading to three overarching themes.
The Hague Conference on Private International Law has established a working group to examine a possible international instrument applicable to the same or related actions in courts in different countries. The goal of the project should be to improve the efficiency of resolving such situations and providing as complete a resolution as possible by channeling litigation to the “better forum.” Current approaches—lis alibi pendens in the civil law world and forum non conveniens in the common law world—are not working well and are likely to be increasingly inadequate in an ever more complex and fluid world. In this Article we provide suggestions on the architecture and certain critical features of a convention in this area.
This Comment argues that corporate anticorruption compliance programs would complement existing anticorruption strategies in the Northern Triangle.
In 2020, an international tribunal acknowledged in a landmark decision that deportation to a place where climate change would put an individual’s life at risk may violate certain provisions of international human rights law. Yet, the tribunal failed to formally recognize climate refugees or provide recommendations for their protection, perpetuating a “legal void” in the global migration framework. This Essay examines how existing provisions of refugee law, international human rights law, and international environmental law could be expanded to fill this void that legal scholarship has not directly addressed.
This Comment considers the four countries that have passed domestic legislation giving private property rights over extracted space resources to their citizens: the United States, the United Arab Emirates, Luxembourg, and Japan.
This Article seeks to determine which scholarly approach regarding de jure and de facto recognition is most consistent with the U.S.’s actual attitude toward the Baltic annexation.
This Article looks at how the Uniting for Peace Resolution could have mitigated the suffering in Syria, and how it can be used effectively in future conflicts.
This Essay presents a hypothetical case in which North Korean operatives, aided by operatives from Russia and China, have stolen $500 million in COVID-19 relief funds from the U.S. Treasury through hacking, all while residing in their respective countries. The purpose of this hypothetical is to explore the legal bases that the United States may use to prosecute cybercrimes and obtain judgments against foreign cybercriminals.
Our editorial team interviewed two UChicago Law Professors, Tom Ginsburg and Claudia Flores, about discuss the rights of nature—a developing area of law domestically and internationally.
This Article argues that the long process of creating the rules for Disclosure of Payments by Resource Extraction Issuers, while frustrating for SEC officials and staff, can be conceptualized as a “stag hunt” involving other countries that host extraction companies on their stock exchanges.