discussing potential “serious consequences, such as subjecting the United States to sanctions, undermining U.S. standing in the world community, or encouraging retaliation against U.S. person-, nel abroad” should political branches “ignore or disregard international-law norms” but nonetheless maintaining that “in our constitutional system of separated powers, it is for Congress and the President — not the courts — to determine in the first instance whether and how the United States will meet its international obligations”
How later courts described this case
- discussing potential “serious consequences, such as subjecting the United States to sanctions, undermining U.S. standing in the world community, or encouraging retaliation against U.S. person-, nel abroad” should political branches “ignore or disregard international-law norms” but nonetheless maintaining that “in our constitutional system of separated powers, it is for Congress and the President — not the courts — to determine in the first instance whether and how the United States will meet its international obligations”
- emphasizing that “[a]pplying” certain legal rules “to particular factual situations” in the foreign affairs and national security contexts involves a great deal “of subjective judgment”
- characterizing the “notion, common in the early years of the Nation ... that international law was part of the general common law that federal courts could apply” as “now discredited”
- finding “no persuasive evidence” to show “Congress would want a court to alter its interpretation of a statute based on a non-self-executing treaty”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
ORDER
On Petition for Rehearing En Banc
Appellant’s petition for rehearing en banc and the response thereto were circulated to the full court, and a vote was requested. Thereafter, a majority of the judges eligible to participate did not vote in favor of the petition. Upon consideration of the foregoing and the -brief of amici curiae, it is
ORDERED that the petition be denied.
* A statement by Chief Judge Sentelle and Circuit Judges Ginsburg, Henderson, Rogers, Tatel, Garland, and Griffith, concurring in the denial of rehearing en banc, is attached.
* A statement by Circuit Judge Brown, concurring in the denial of rehearing en banc, is attached.
* A statement by Circuit Judge Kava-naugh, concurring in the denial of rehearing en banc, is attached.
* A statement by Senior Circuit Judge Williams is attached.