SUFFOLK TRANSNATIONAL

Document Sample
SUFFOLK TRANSNATIONAL Powered By Docstoc
					    SUFFOLK
 TRANSNATIONAL
   LAW REVIEW

       2011 Open Write-On
       Competition Packet



Start Date: Friday, May 20, 2011 at 12:00 P.M.
End Date: Friday, June 3, 2011 at 5:00 P.M.
             Suffolk Transnational Law Review
                 Open Write-On Competition
                            2011

                         Table of Contents


A.   Letter from the Editor-in-Chief

B.   Introduction to Suffolk Transnational Law Review

C.   Open Write-On Competition Instructional Handbook

D.   International Legal Research

E.   Suffolk Transnational Law Review Pet Peeves

F.   Bluebook Supplement

G.   Bluebook Quiz

H.   Case-in-Chief –

          U.S. v. Weingarten, 632 F.3d 60 (2nd Cir. 2011).

I.   Open Write-On Competition Checklist
                                                                                   Friday, May 20, 2011
Dear Suffolk Transnational Law Review Candidate:

        Thank you for your interest in the Suffolk Transnational Law Review and for choosing to
participate in our Open Write-On Competition. As our world becomes increasingly interconnected, the
importance of international and transnational law is greater than ever. The Suffolk Transnational Law
Review is a leading academic publication dedicated to facilitating and advancing discourse on the legal
issues arising in this growing area of law. We are composed of an enthusiastic group of students,
committed to being part of this exciting process. I look forward to welcoming you to the team as we
move into our 35th year.

         The Open Write-On Competition allows students the opportunity to gain membership on
Transnational Law Review regardless of class rank. The competition is open to all students in good
standing who have completed either the first year day or second year evening law school curricula. The
Competition invites students to write a Case Comment based on an appellate decision selected by the
Transnational Law Review Executive Board. The decision is included in this packet in its entirety along
with other materials that will assist you in composing your Case Comment. Should you run into
difficulties along the way, feel free to contact me at dayost@suffolk.edu. Please note that in order to
make the Competition fair and our ultimate selection of staff members impartial, I am limited in the
questions I can answer.

        Traditionally, a fraction of those who pick up and take the packet ultimately submit a Case
Comment for the competition. Feeling daunted, even discouraged, by the task at hand is inevitable. For
most of you, this is your first attempt at writing a Case Comment, which poses new challenges to even the
best writers. We understand this. I encourage you, when feeling overwhelmed or in doubt, to reread the
materials enclosed in this packet. We have included information and guidance that should help you in
every step of the process. What we are looking for is similar to what was expected of you in LPS; that
you follow the directions and provide a thoughtful, logical analysis supported by legal precedent.

        The Competition deadline is 5:00 P.M. on Friday, June 3, 2011. Students must email and turn
in their competition pieces to the Transnational suite located on the fourth floor of the law school.
Special arrangements can be made on a case-by-case basis, but you must email me beforehand at
dayost@suffolk.edu. While we are happy to facilitate participation for students who will not be in the
area during the competition, we expect the majority of competitors to turn in physical copies of their
pieces.

         Suffolk Transnational Law Review’s Executive Board will review all competition submissions
and together decide which pieces we will accept for staff membership. On Sunday, June 19, 2011, you
will either be extended an invitation for membership by telephone, or otherwise by email.

On behalf of Suffolk Transnational Law Review, I wish you the best of luck!

                                                                Sincerely,




                                                                D. Andrew Yost
                                                                Editor-in-Chief
                   Introduction to Suffolk Transnational Law Review

        The Suffolk Transnational Law Review is one of the oldest international law journals in the
country and serves as a forum to discuss and examine contemporary international legal issues.
Transnational thrives in its unique role as both a prestigious Honor Board and a complement to
Suffolk University Law School’s distinguished international law faculty and international law
organizations. Since its inception in 1976, Transnational has emerged as a nationally and
internationally recognized publication. Practicing attorneys, universities, law schools, and libraries
around the world subscribe to the journal.

        As the world continues to globalize, so, too, does the importance of international law.
Transnational Law Review provides its members with the opportunity to develop an understanding of
both public and private international legal issues. In the last year, Transnational staff members have
written on many topics including: the affect of European Union expansion on asylum for persecuted
Europeans; combating climate change and striving for sustainable development in the developing
world thru regional cooperation; and the need for the United States and international community to
cooperate in counterterrorism efforts.

       Transnational Law Review is entirely student organized and operated. Each year, Transnational
produces one volume that consists of three books, published in the winter, spring and summer.
Each book contains lead articles authored by noted legal scholars, as well as staff members’ work.

       One of the books in the volume is the symposium book, which is composed of a collection of
articles written by a group of academics on a specific legal issue. This year’s Symposium focused on
international humanitarian law and aid during armed conflicts. The Symposium panelists consisted of
Senior Fellow at Brown University Sue Eckert, Professor Peter Margulies of Roger Williams School
of Law; Naz Modirzadeh, Associate Director, Program on Humanitarian Policy and Conflict
Research at Harvard University; Amanda Shanor from the Center on National Security and the Law
at Georgetown Law; and Professor Stephen Vladeck from American University Washington College
of Law.

        Suffolk Transnational Law Review also holds a Speaker Series. The Series brings foreign policy
experts, government officials, and prominent members of the international legal community to
Suffolk University Law School to discuss international legal issues and foreign policy. Transnational
Law Review also seeks to hold informal discussion or colloquia during which Suffolk faculty and
students are exposed to emerging areas of transnational law.

         Law review membership is considered a prestigious accomplishment. Many employers seek
to hire law review members because of the skills gained through participation with a journal. Suffolk
Transnational Law Review affords its members the opportunity to distinguish their legal academic
careers from those of their colleagues by improving their editing, legal writing, and researching skills,
while instilling self-discipline, self-motivation, and professionalism. Students on Transnational may
receive one to two credits per semester and satisfy Suffolk Law School’s legal writing requirement.
                        SUFFOLK TRANSNATIONAL LAW REVIEW
                       STAFF MEMBER WRITING REQUIREMENTS


        As a staff member on Transnational Law Review, all students are required to write either one
Note, two Case Comments, or two Book Notes over the course of the academic year. This
improves student authors’ writing abilities and legal research skills. All staff members are supervised
by an editor who assists them in refining and improving their writing in pursuit of producing a piece
of publishable quality. Staff members are expected to be responsive to constructive criticism,
engage in active discussions with various editors while striving to produce a publishable product. At
the end of a staff members’ first year on Transnational Law Review, significant improvements to their
legal writing and analytical skills will be evident.

Writing a Note

         A Note author must choose a topic highlighting a contemporary international legal issue and
seek to create a thesis that will contribute to the area of law in which the author is writing. The
central element of a Note is the major claim, which is the culmination of the analysis. Authors
receive helpful advice regarding their topic from the Chief Note Editor in the late summer months
of their first year as a staff member. A prospective author should not select a topic that has been
examined in other law reviews unless the author has a unique perspective or the law has changed,
thereby creating a new legal issue. Students work on their Notes over the course of the year under
the supervision of the Chief Note Editor and receive periodic feedback from individually assigned
Note Editors regarding the form of their Note, contextual suggestions, and proper use of the
Bluebook. The final draft of the Note is approximately 150 pages total, with 50 pages of text and
100 pages of footnotes (in standard law review format), and is submitted to the Chief Note Editor
for evaluation in the spring. The Chief Note Editor and the Editor-in-Chief consider each piece for
publication in the law review, with the highest quality Notes receiving offers to publish with the
journal.

Writing a Case Comment

         A Case Comment is an analysis of a recent appellate court decision that represents a change,
modification, or significant interpretation of the law. Comments contain six sections that are
separate and distinct from each other. In the Analysis section of the Case Comment, the author
must answer whether the court’s holding solved the problem at bar; whether the court misstated or
misidentified the problem; whether any alternative solutions were available; and, whether future
litigation may reasonably be anticipated as a result of this decision.

Writing a Book Note

        Book Note authors must choose a recently published book that discusses an international
issue of legal significance. Most Book Notes address one book, although two related books may be
analyzed in one Book Note. A Book Note should educate the reader about the particular issue(s)
addressed in the particular book. The author must conduct a careful reading of the book and
perform extensive research on the topic it covers, so as to determine whether the book’s thesis is
valid.
                            Suffolk Transnational Law Review
         OPEN WRITE-ON COMPETITION INSTRUCTIONAL HANDBOOK


        To compete in the Open Write-On Competition, students are required to complete a Case
Comment and a Bluebook Quiz. In addition, students with personal experiences relevant to
membership on the Transnational Law Review, may choose to include a 250-word personal statement
discussing these experiences. This personal statement is not required to compete and an election
not to turn one in will not reflect negatively on individual competitors.

BLUEBOOK QUIZ:

        The Bluebook Quiz should be completed by typing corrected citations on a separate sheet of
paper from your Case Comment. The Quiz contains instructions at the beginning that should be
followed precisely. Each portion of each citation should be checked against the Bluebook and
corrected accordingly. The more time and care that is put into the Quiz the better the outcome.
Take your time and carefully correct each citation.

CASE COMMENT:

A. GENERAL APPROACH

        Many students believe that because legal writing is rigorous, it must also be dull.
Consequently, Suffolk Transnational Law Review receives many pieces that are depressingly uniform,
overloaded with verbiage, and lacking in force and color. Too often, inexperienced writers imitate
other students whose work has been published rather than expressing their own originality. Please
do not feel that you must conform to some preconceived notion of “scholarly writing.” At the same
time, a law review article should not be colloquial; it is a formal piece of legal analysis. Choose
precise and understandable language while seeking to use simple sentence structure.

        Strive particularly for coherent paragraph organization so that ideas develop in logical
progression. Your analysis is likely to be complex, but the reader will follow it best if you follow a
simple organizational framework. If a person unfamiliar with your topic cannot immediately
understand your article, the organization is probably defective. To protect against this, we highly
encourage you to work from an outline and make every entry a complete sentence. Rearrange
sentences within a paragraph so that each paragraph becomes a satisfying logical unit. Also,
rearrange the order of paragraphs so that your text flows from premise to conclusion without
tangents or illogical interruptions.

        Extreme thoroughness will inevitably result in high quality work. We understand that it is
impossible to commit the Bluebook to memory in the limited amount of time you have to write
your piece. It is best to look up each citation as you write an endnote to ensure the cite is complete
and the signal, order of signals, and typeface are correct.

        Please do not be discouraged if you find that drafting your first law review article is a
painfully slow process. Writing is difficult work because a great deal of energy must be expended in
writing and rewriting before your thoughts are stated in a concise form. It is also a time-consuming
task and there are no short cuts. The following suggestions may provide some guidance:

B. FORMATTING REQUIREMENTS

       Your piece will be a Case Comment, consisting of a maximum of forty-five (45) pages in
length, triple spaced, with two (2) inch margins on all four sides. In general, there should be a
2:1 endnote-to-text ratio. Thus, if you have fifteen (15) pages of triple spaced text, you should have
approximately thirty (30) pages of triple spaced endnotes.

        The competition piece must strictly conform to both the Bluebook and the Bluebook
Supplement. Every sentence, except for those in your conclusion, must be endnoted in the proper
format specified in the 18th or 19th edition of the Bluebook and in the Transnational Bluebook
Supplement. Opinions must be endnoted as well because they are essentially the product of
research.

C. WRITING A CASE COMMENT

        A Case Comment is an analysis of a recent appellate court decision that represents a change,
modification, or significant interpretation of the law. Comments contain six sections that are
separate and distinct from each other. Information that properly belongs in one section should not
be developed in another. For example, the facts of the case should only be developed in the facts
section. These facts may, of course, be mentioned elsewhere as necessary, but you should not
introduce new facts in other sections. Similarly, the analysis should not contain startling references
to propositions of law that were not introduced and explained in the history portion of the Case
Comment.

       The following outline describes each section of a Case Comment and suggests the number
of paragraphs that should be devoted to a given section. Please note that every paragraph of a Case
Comment, regardless of the section it is in, must contain at least three sentences. You must endnote
every sentence except those in your conclusion. Generally there are approximately two pages of
endnotes for every page of text in a final draft.

        Before starting to write a Case Comment, it is instructive to read some of the Case
Comments contained Suffolk Transnational Law Review volumes, which are available in the law library
and on Westlaw and Lexis. Entrants in the writing competition should be mindful, however, that
published Case Comments are the final product of a lengthy and intense editorial process and
contain a certain polish that is not expected from first drafts.

        The following outline is presented to help you organize your Case Comment. Do not label
these sections on the final version of your Comment.

Heading/Title

   1) General field of law (e.g., criminal law, constitutional law, tort law);
   2) Concise statement describing the case in a phrase of 15 words or less;
   3) Name of case and citation, followed by a period.
Example: Constitutional Law--Harmless-Error Analysis Applies to Erroneously Admitted Coerced
Confessions--Arizona v. Fulminante, 111 S. Ct. 1246 (1991).

Introduction (1 paragraph, 3-4 sentences)

    1)   Statement of broad field of law;
    2)   Identification of sub-area of law;
    3)   Name of court, name of case, and a statement of issue considered by the court;
    4)   Concise statement of the holding of the case.

       Note that the first time you mention the case-in-chief in the text, it must be followed by an
endnote. An endnote containing the citation to a case name mentioned in text is the only instance
where a sentence in the text will have more than one endnote.

Facts (2-3 paragraphs)

    1) Factual events leading up to the litigation (cite to case-in-chief or lower court decision in
       endnotes);
    2) Posture and result of lower court decision (cite to lower court decisions or case-in-chief in
       endnotes);
    3) You may cite any statute relied upon by the court, but do not present any in-depth history in
       this section;
    4) The last sentence should contain a more detailed, but not repetitious, statement of the
       holding.

        This section should identify the parties to the litigation and all pertinent facts. Only the most
basic facts should be included in the text. Any additional facts, if relevant to the decision, may be
expanded in the endnotes. Disposition in the lower courts should be discussed, with a brief
statement of the basis of those rulings. Any extended discussion of lower court rulings, if necessary,
should be relegated to the endnotes.

        This is an important section and should be organized carefully. It must contain all of the
facts necessary to an understanding of both the court's and the writer's analysis. It is inappropriate
to wait until later sections of the Comment to introduce key facts.

History (3 paragraphs)

    1) This section should be objective;
    2) If several issues or facets of issues are raised, try to organize your paragraphs so that they are
       grouped logically in different paragraphs;
    3) Include all law considered by the majority and any dissenters in your case-in-chief, so that
       you may refer to it later in your analysis;
    4) Include any law you think the court should have considered but did not;
    5) Develop thorough, complete and lengthy endnotes in this section; it is particularly
       appropriate to have string cites with clear explanatory blurbs;
    6) Generally, you should use blurbs for all citations in the history section;
    7) Do not cite to the case-in-chief or lower court decisions in this section.
       Thoroughly discuss the background and development of the law in this section. Keep in
mind, however, that you are not writing a brief. Only landmark cases should be named in the text.
Reserve the text for an expository discussion of the history of the law and cite important cases in the
endnotes. Any cases you use when discussing the court's analysis or your own analysis must be
mentioned in either the facts or history section.

Court's Reasoning (1-2 paragraphs)

   1) Name the case-in-chief again, so the reader knows that your are returning to it;
   2) Explain how the court applied the precedent to the facts of the case-in-chief;
   3) Be objective.

        The purpose of the first sentence is to alert the reader that the focus of the paper is shifting
from a discussion of the established law to a discussion of how the court applied the law to the facts
before it. This section, though a preface to your analysis, is a separate and distinct section. Outline
the logical steps the court took in reaching its holding and explain how its reasoning fits in with the
previous section.

        Without actually analyzing the case, you should show, for example, how the case-in-chief fits
in with your discussion of the law in your history section. The last sentence of this section should
form a smooth and natural transition into your analysis by incorporating a "result oriented"
restatement of the holding.

Analysis (3 paragraphs)

   1) Explain the merits and mistakes in the court's decision;
   2) Try to address each of the steps taken by the Court as outlined in the Court's Reasoning
      section.

Among the questions to be answered in this section are:

      Did the court's holding solve the problem at bar?
      Did the court misstate or misidentify the problem?
      What alternative solutions were available?
      Is the holding a complete departure from existing law?
      Does it reinterpret existing law or create new law?
      Is it a reaffirmation of principles previously discarded?
      How might the holding affect future decisions?
      What future litigation may reasonably be anticipated as a result of this decision?
      What will be the impact of the decision on other jurisdictions?

       Whereas the previous sections focus on the objective, this section provides the writer with
the opportunity to express his or her own interpretation of what the court did or might have done.
You may make predictions here, but they must be the product of legal argument, not mere opinion.
Remember that every proposition must be followed by an endnote and substantiated with good
authority. Unsubstantiated speculation is of little value to the legal community and reflects poorly
on the writer.

         Every sentence in the Analysis section must have an endnote. Your endnotes may contain
direct citations to the case-in-chief (majority, concurrences, and dissents), other cases, and/or law
review articles already mentioned in the history section, or, you may simply “supra note [note #], at
[pg. #]” to direct the reader to a discussion in prior endnotes. DO NOT introduce any new material
in this section. All law and facts should have been introduced in a previous section.

Conclusion (1 paragraph)

   1) Statement of the issue
   2) Concise critique of court's analysis and holding.

        You should not raise any new points in the section. This section must be brief. There is no
need to be expansive because the conclusion should be compelled by and self-evident from your
analysis.

D. RESEARCH INFORMATION

        In addition to the sources provided by us, you may use any other official source available to
you. You may use Westlaw, Lexis, and any other electronic or book research method you desire.
Attached is information detailing how you can have your Westlaw and Lexis access extended
through the summer to use during the competition (see the International Legal Research section for
instructions).

        You may not, however, consult with or discuss the subject of your competition piece with
any other person, including any other participant, attorney, family member, or member of Suffolk
Transnational Law Review. Moreover, all pieces MUST be the original work of the participant and not
a piece submitted for any class requirement at Suffolk University Law School or any other school.

E. WRITING HINTS

Plagiarism: There are two types of plagiarism: paraphrasing ideas without endnoting and direct
quoting of another writer’s language. Another person’s ideas must always be endnoted. The general
rule regarding use of another’s language is that one should never use a complete phrase from any
outside source without placing it in quotation marks. Exercise extreme caution in this area.

Quoting: Quote only that which would lose its meaning when paraphrased. This suggestion should
especially be considered when using quoted language in the text of your paper. If you have more
than a few quotations, consider whether all are necessary. Your article should reflect your own
thoughts and language, supported by endnoted authority.

Surnames: When you talk about parties in a case, always use the surnames of the parties rather than
defining them as plaintiff, defendant, appellant, or petitioner. This rule applies to authors to whom
you refer in your Note as well. Do not mention their titles, unless the author is a judge.
Literary Polish: Leave time to apply a coat of literary and technical polish to your piece. Check
whether endnotes support the text, whether additional endnotes are needed, and whether endnotes
should be combined, condensed, or deleted.

F. STANDARDS FOR EVALUATING OPEN WRITE-ON COMPETITION PIECES

Suffolk Transnational Law Review will use the following criteria to evaluate the competition pieces
submitted:

   1) Writing Ability: All new staff members must possess a strong command over style, grammar,
      and spelling in order to complete their own articles and to cite-check and proofread the
      work of others. Strictly following the Case Comment format is paramount to success.
      Therefore, style, grammar, and spelling play a key role in evaluating competition pieces.
      Furthermore, publishable legal writing must be clear and concise.

   2) Technical Form: An author’s ability to master the subtleties of the Bluebook is a good
      indication of his or her ability to succeed as a member of the Suffolk Transnational Law Review
      staff.

   3) Analysis: A successful author thoroughly develops the sub-issues relevant to the topic.
      Additionally, a good author’s analysis progresses logically and reaches a conclusion that is
      supported by the preceding text.

G. MISCELLANEOUS

   1) The competition piece must be submitted on standard 8 1/2” x 11” white paper. All sheets
      (text and endnotes) must be triple-spaced with 2” margins on all four edges. Do not justify
      the right margin. Use Courier New 12 point font.

   2) Avoid passive voice. Whenever possible, the author should use the active voice rather than
      the passive voice. The active voice follows a subject-verb-object sequence. A passive
      construction follows an object-verb-subject sequence. Passive sentences consist of forms of
      the verb to “be” and the past participle of the main verb.

       A passive construction may be appropriate, however, if the author does not know or does
       not want to emphasize the actor or subject, if the object of the sentence is more important
       than the actor, or if the actor is obvious, as in “a new mayor was elected” (where the actor is
       clearly the voters).

   3) Use endnotes, not footnotes.

   4) When you are discussing cases, the names of very important cases may be placed in the text,
      but all citations must appear in the endnotes.

   5) Citation form must conform to the 18th or 19th edition of A Uniform System of Citation
      (The Bluebook) and the Transnational Bluebook Supplement.
6) Each competition piece should be stapled once in the upper left-hand corner. Do not bind
   your pieces or place them in folders.



7) You must submit ten copies to the Transnational Office (Suite 440) and email one copy to
   SuffolkTransnationalLawReview@gmail.com by 5:00 P.M. on Friday, June 3, 2011. If you
   finish your note before June 3, 2011 and would like to turn it in, you may e-mail it to
   dayost@suffolk.edu.

8) We have enclosed a checklist to help ensure that you complete all the steps necessary for us
   to make a thorough and fair evaluation of your piece.

9) To ensure fairness and anonymity, DO NOT put your name anywhere on your piece. Place
   your Student I.D. number on the top right-hand corner of the first page of each copy of
   your completed Case Comment. Additionally, please place your name, Student I.D. number,
   your 2011-2011 law school class, and a phone number and email where you can be reached
   on Sunday, June 19, 2011, as well as a summer address on the checklist provided and include
   the checklist in your materials.
                          INTERNATIONAL LEGAL RESEARCH


I. Introduction

        In order to understand how to research international law, you must first understand what
international law is. International law is not only the system of laws of other foreign nations;
international law is part of our domestic law. Any laws, whether domestic or foreign, that affect the
interactions of nations are "international" in nature and scope.

II. General Approach to International Legal Research

        There have always been, and perhaps always will be, disagreements about the origins of
international law. The origins of international law can be narrowed down to three broad categories:
(1) "natural law," meaning non-provable axioms and principles of law; (2) international legislation,
including custom and practice as codified in treaties, international agreements, and the
proclamations of international bodies; and (3) municipal laws and court decisions.

A.      Philosophy

       1.      Frame the Issues

        Before commencing research, the researcher should take time to analyze the issues and to
ask him or herself: (1) what are my time and energy constraints; (2) what do I already know about
the question; (3) what and how much information do I need; and (4) how will I organize my
research and record my results. The more specific the researcher's answers to these questions are,
the more efficient the researcher will be in his or her research.

        The researcher may want to organize the research by time, scope, or subject matter. Is the
information sought current or historical? Older information may not be available on electronic
media and may require the researcher to look to hard copies. The researcher should also decide
whether the information needed is comprehensive or limited, whether detailed analyses and facts are
required, or whether the information is needed solely for background purposes.

       2.      Analyze the Problem

        Analysis is the key to determining how to begin the search on an international legal topic.
Decide what information needs to be found. Do not spend time researching information on topics
that have been thoroughly discussed by others. A research question, by comparison, is one to which
the answer does not yet exist. Accordingly, the researcher must not only research the facts, but also
consult a number of sources for a basis of detailed legal analysis.

        To analyze a problem, the researcher may refer to textbooks, casebooks, and hornbooks in
order to familiarize him-/herself with the topic. The researcher may also wish to consult
international law bibliographies, handbooks, manuals, guides, and organizations themselves.
         3.     Review Available Contacts and Resources

       Once the researcher has defined the problem, the researcher should consider where he or
she can find answers and information. The researcher should consult a listing of international legal
sources to determine what primary and secondary sources are required.

         4.     Create a Bibliography

       Creating a bibliography prior to beginning research will allow the researcher to identify all
the important resources thereby providing an overview of the subject.

         5.     Run a Few Trials

        Steps taken during the initial attempt at researching the issue may not yield useful results. It
may take more than one attempt to find meaningful information on a topic. If one approach to
research proves ineffective, do not feel as if this is the only way. Experiment with defining and
analyzing the problem until you begin to find meaningful sources for your research.

B.       Useful Sources

         1.     Introductory Sources

         Introductory information can be found in encyclopedias, legal research guides,
bibliographies, and, occasionally, articles. Some of the best introductory international legal sources
are: Valerie Epps, International Law For Undergraduates; Peter Malanczuk, Akehurst’s Modern Introduction
to International Law; Thomas H. Reynolds & Arthur A. Flores, Foreign Law: Current Sources of Codes and
Legislation in Jurisdictions of the World; Clair Germain, Germain's Transnational Law Research: A Guide for
Attorneys. These sources may provide leads to specific documents. Another source of practical
information and research tips is The George Washington University Journal of International Law
and Economics, Guide to International Legal Research. Pay special attention to the first chapter as it
presents a good overview of research techniques, tools, and processes.

        Additionally, there are a number of websites that are helpful in finding topics as well as
international legal materials:

        United Nations home page, http://www.un.int/

        U.S. State Department home page, http://www.state.gov/

        European Union Server, http://europa.eu/

        The Economist Online, http://www.economist.com/

        White House Electronic Library, http://www.whitehouse.gov/
      Georgetown University, Institute for International Law and Politics,
       http://iilp.georgetown.edu/resources/

      Northwestern University Collection of International Organization Documents,
       http://www.library.northwestern.edu/govinfo/resource/internat/igo.html

      NYU Collection of International Law Sites on the Internet,
       http://www.law.nyu.edu/library/research/foreign_intl/index.htm

      Cornell Law Library, http://library.lawschool.cornell.edu/WhatWeHave/Foreign/index.cfm

       2.      Primary Sources

               a.      LexisNexis and Westlaw

        Only the cost of using these on-line research tools limits their practicality in the real world.
Most hard-bound volumes can be located on-line. Other sources such as treaties and periodicals
may also be available. Lexis has an International Law Library (INTLAW) as one of its main
resource areas, which has strong coverage in Canada, England, Europe and the European Union,
France, and Wales. Westlaw’s coverage is lacking in this area. Additionally, both services are limited
to information added since the early 1980s. Westlaw provides complete coverage of the
International Court of Justice and treaties. Additionally, Lexis has a "Hot Topics" database that
contains emerging international issues, and Westlaw has a database of foreign affairs entitled
"FORGNAFF".

       3.      Secondary Sources

        Several secondary legal resources exist for the international legal researcher. Such resources
include CNN, the New York Times International page and other legal periodicals, which assist a
researcher in finding primary sources of international law.

NOTE: Other discretionary research techniques for international law can be found in other law
review articles and periodicals.
                        WESTLAW AND LEXIS SUMMER ACCESS


         You can extend your Westlaw and Lexis passwords for use during this competition. In
order to have access to this computer-based research, you must follow the steps below. Please note
that it generally takes two to three days for your password to be re-activated.

Westlaw:

Log onto: <www.lawschool.westlaw.com>. Click on “Extend your Westlaw Password for the
summer.” Enter your password or username and password. The first survey question asks “What
are your plans for the summer?” Select “Law Review/Journal.” The remaining survey questions are
not mandatory. If you have any difficulty, contact WESTLAW at (800) 937-8529.

Lexis:

Log onto: <www.lexis.com/lawschool>, click on the SUMMER ACCESS link and fill out the form.
Your reason for extension is -“Law Review/Journal.” If you have any difficulty, contact LEXIS at
(800)543-6862.
             20101-20112



Bluebook Citation and Style Supplement
                       20110-20112
           SUFFOLK TRANSNATIONAL LAW REVIEW
         BLUEBOOK CITATION & STYLE SUPPLEMENT
        This supplement contains simplified explanations of Bluebook rules that are unclear, as well
as examples for rules that are particularly important. In addition, we have detailed certain rules of
citation and formatting not appearing in the Bluebook that Suffolk Transnational Law Review has
adopted.

       Where the two styles differ, the rules within this supplement control.


                                      EXECUTIVE BOARD


                                          Editor-in-Chief
                              WINNIE Y. TRANDONALD ANDREW YOST


                                         Executive Editor
                             MICHAEL AJEMIANCHRISTOPHER J. ABBOTT


             Chief Articles Editor                              Chief Managing Editor
      BRIAN HAYNESMELISSA BRUYNELL                     MICHAEL LAFLEURKATHRYN DOWNING &
                                                                 SCOTT DUNBERG


                 Chief Note Editor                              Chief Production Editor
        JASON CHANDLERBRIAN DOYLE                             KEVIN PEARCESEAN FOLEY


            Chief Comments Editor                              Chief Symposium Editor
     JOSHUA WODACHRISTOPHER MILLER                      ELIZABETH HOLLANDWESLEY RITCHIE


                                      Chief Competitions Editor
                                     CHRISTOPHER FITZGERALD
                                       CONTENTS
                                                 :
Rule 1     FOOTNOTES .............................................................................................. 1
   1.1     Where and When to Footnote
   1.2     Punctuation and Footnotes
   1.3     Spacing in Footnotes

  Rule 2      SIGNALS (see BB Rules 1.2–1.4) ..........................................................................1
  2.1      When Signals Are Required
  2.2      What Signals to Use
  2.3      Order of Signals (see BB Rule 1.3)
  2.4      See generally
  2.5.4    Order of Authorities Within Each Signal (see BB Rule 1.4)
   2.56    Signals as Verbs in Footnote Textual Sentences

 Rule 3     PARENTHETICAL PHRASES (PARENTHETICAL PHRASES (BLURBS)) (see BB
                             Rule 1.5)   4
   3.1     When Blurbs Are Required
   3.2     Length and Style of Blurbs
   3.3     Blurbs in Lead Articles

Rule 4     PINPOINT CITES (see BB Rule 3) ...........................................................5
   4.1     When Pinpoint Cites Are Needed
   4.2     Pinpoint Cites for Parallel Cites
   4.3     Page Numbers

Rule 5     ID. (see BB Rule 4.1) ....................................................................................6
    5.1    When to Use Id.
    5.2    Id. and Internal Cross-Reference
    5.3    Capitalization of Id.
    5.4    Id. and Punctuation

Rule 6     SUPRA (see BB Rule 4.2).............................................................................7
   6.1     Short Citation
   6.2     Internal Cross-Reference
   6.3     Supra to Supra

Rule 7     INFRA (see BB Rule 3.5) .............................................................................10
    7.1    How to Use Infra
    7.2    Infra to Infra, Supra
Rule 8    HEREINAFTER (see BB Rule 4.2).............................................................11

Rule 9    CASES (see BB Rule 10) ..............................................................................11
    9.1   Case Name Format
    9.2   Court of Decision
    9.3   Federal District Court/Court of Appeals
    9.4   Abbreviation of Case Names
    9.5   Case Names in the Text
    9.6   Subsequent History
    9.7   Short Citation Form
    9.8   Cases from Foreign Jurisdictions


Rule 10   INTERNATIONAL CASES (compare BB Rule 21.5).................................14
   10.1   International Court of Justice and Permanent Court of International Justice
          Decisions
   10.2   International Criminal Court and International Criminal Tribunal Decisions
   10.3   Short Citation Form for International Cases

Rule 11   INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATIONS (see BB Rule 21.6) ......................15

Rule 12   PERIODICALS (see BB Rule 16) ...............................................................16
   12.1   Formatting
   12.2   Citing Lead Articles in Law Reviews
   12.3   Citing Student Works in Law Reviews

Rule 13   BOOKS AND NONPERIODICALS (see BB Rule 15) .............................17

Rule 14   INTERNET SOURCES (see BB Rule 18.2) ...............................................17
   14.1   Basic Citation Principles
   14.2   Direct Citations
   14.3   Date of Internet Citations
   14.4   Parenthetical Information
   14.5   Pinpoint Citations
   14.6   Weblogs
   14.7   Preservation of Information

Rule 15   PRESS RELEASES (see BB Rule 17.1.3)...................................................21
Rule 16            PRINTING CODES .....................................................................................22
   16.1            Generally
   16.2            Italics/Underline
   16.3            Large and Small Capitals/Bold
   16.4            Block Quote Codes

Rule 17            SPACING......................................................................................................23
   17.1            Periods
   17.2            Other Punctuation
    17.3 Symbols
    17.4           Hyphens, En Dashes, and Em Dashes
    17.5           Reporters and Abbreviations
    17.6           Ellipses

Rule 18            STYLE ..........................................................................................................24
   18.1            Hyphenation
   18.2            Foreign Words
   18.3            Paragraphs
   18.4            Quotations/Quotation Marks
   18.5            Spelling
   18.6            Use of Symbols

Rule 19            CAPITALIZATION (see BB Rule 8)..........................................................25
   19.1            Generally
   19.2            Court

Rule 20            ABBREVIATIONS (see BB Rule 6.1) ........................................................26

Rule 21            TAGGING NAMES .....................................................................................27

Rule 22            NUMBERING (see BB Rule 6.2).................................................................27

Rule 23            LEAD ARTICLES .......................................................................................28

Appendix I         Suggested Blurb Participles ...........................................................................29

Appendix II        Common Missteps .........................................................................................30

Appendix III Titles and Headings........................................................................................32
Appendix IV Cross-Referencing.......................................................................................... 34
RULE 1: FOOTNOTES

1.1   Where and When to Footnote

      Every textual sentence must be footnoted. If a case name is part of the textual sentence, a
      footnote should immediately follow the case name. Case names within textual sentences
      are the only occasion for a mid-sentence footnote.                                                        Formatted: Font: Bold


      Examples:
      In Roe v. Wade,1 the Court addressed the penumbra of
      constitutional rights.2
      1
          410 U.S. 113 (1973).                                                                                  Formatted: Indent: Left: 0"
      2
          Id.                                                                                                   Formatted: Font: Not Bold
                                                                                                                Formatted: Superscript
                                                                                                                Formatted: Font: Not Bold, Underline
1.2   Punctuation and Footnotes

      (a)    The footnote number should appear after the punctuation in the sentence—e.g.,
             after the comma or period.

      (b)    Every footnote must end with a period, even if the footnote only contains one
             word.

                     Example:
                     1
                       See id.


1.3   Spacing in Footnotes

      (a)    Leave one space between the footnote number and the beginning of the
             footnote/citation text.

      (b)    Leave two spaces between the end of aone sentence in the footnotes and the beginning of the next
             cite.
                                                                                                                Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5", Hanging: 0.5"




RULE 2: SIGNALS (SEE BB RULE 1.2)

2.1   When Signals Are Required

      Signals are required for all cited authority in support of textual assertions in the text and
      in the footnotes. Introductory signals are used to indicate the weight of cited authority.



                                                                                                            1
      Example:
      See John Calvin Jefferies, Jr. & Paul B. Stephan, III,
      Defenses, Presumptions, and the Burden of Proof in the
      Criminal Law, 88 Yale L.J. 1325, 1329-30 (1979) (requiring
      defendants to prove insanity). The authors point out that
      the use of the affirmative defenses may relieve the state
      of its duty to prove a sufficient factual basis for
      punishment. See id. at 1357.
2.2   What Signals to Use

      (a) [no signal]   use no signal when the cited authority :                                     Formatted: Indent: Left: 0", First line: 0.5",
                                                                                                     Tab stops: 1.81", Left + 1.88", Left
                         (1) directly states the
                        proposition;,                                                                Formatted: Indent: Left: 1.81", Tab stops:
                                                                                                     1.81", Left
                        (2) identifies the source of a quotation;, or
                           (3) identifies an authority named in the text.                            Formatted: Indent: Left: 1.81", First line: 0",
                                                                                                     Tab stops: 1.81", Left

      (b) See:          use see when the cited authority clearly supports the textual assertion      Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5", Hanging:
                                                                                                     1.31", Tab stops: 1.81", Left
                        but does not directly state it. See is used instead of [no signal] when
                        the cited authority does not directly state the proposition but
                        obviously follows from it; there is an inferential step between the
                        author’s proposition and the authority cited in support is necessary.
                        authority cited and the proposition it supports

      (c) See also:     use see also when the cited authority lends additional support for the       Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5", Hanging:
                                                                                                     1.31", Tab stops: 1.81", Left
                        textual assertion. See also should be used when supporting direct
                        authority that has already been cited or discussed.

      (d) E.g.,:        use e.g., can be used aalone or combined with any signal when to             Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5", Hanging:
                                                                                                     1.31", Tab stops: 1.81", Left
                        indicateing that numerous authorities also state, support, or contradict
                        the proposition, but that citation to all of them would be unnecessary.      Formatted: No underline

                        Explanatory parentheticals (blurbs) should follow each cited source.         Formatted: No underline


      (e) Cf.:          use cf. when the cited authority supports a proposition different from       Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5", Hanging:
                                                                                                     1.31", Tab stops: 1.81", Left
                        the main proposition, but sufficiently analogous to lend support.
                                                                                                     Formatted: Underline

      (f) But see:      use but see when the means authority directly states or clearly              Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5", Hanging:
                                                                                                     1.31", Tab stops: 1.81", Left
                        supports a proposition contrary to the main proposition. It is used
                        where see would be used for support.                                         Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5", Hanging:
                                                                                                     1.31", Tab stops: 1.81", Left

      (g) But cf.:      use but cf. when means citedthe cited authority supports a proposition       Formatted: Underline

                        analogous to the contrary of the main proposition. But should be             Formatted: Font: Not Italic
                        omitted from but cf. whenever it follows but see.                            Formatted: Font: Not Italic
                                                                                                     Formatted: Font: Not Italic
      (h) Accord:       use accord only when citing cases, only when means the cited case(s)         Formatted: Font: Not Italic
                        stand for exactly the same proposition. Only use with cases.                 Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5", Hanging:
                                                                                                     1.31", Tab stops: 1.81", Left
                                                                                                     Formatted: Font: Not Italic




                                                                                                 2
       (i) See generally:   use “See generally” when the entire source addresses the issue. See         Formatted: Font: Italic
                            generally will never appear as part of a string cite; it must be its own    Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5", Hanging:
                            sentence beginning with a capital “S” and ending with a period.             1.31", Tab stops: 1.81", Left

                            There is no pincite in a See generally citation because you are
                            referring to the entire source. There is never a comma after generally.

                                                                                                        Formatted: Font: Not Italic
2.3    Order of Signals (see BB Rule 1.3)                                                               Formatted: Indent: Left: 0", First line: 0"
                                                                                                        Formatted: Font: Not Bold
       String together the same type of signals. There are four types of signals:
               (a)    signals that indicate support [[no signal], see, see also, accord, cf.];
               (b)    signal that suggests useful comparison [compare… with…];
               (c)    signals that indicate contradiction [but see, but cf.];
               (d)    signals that indicate s background material [Ssee generally].


2.4    See generally

       Use “See generally” when the entire source addresses the issue. See generally is never
       used in a string cite. It must be its own sentence ending with a period. There is no
       comma after generally. The “S” in See generally is always capitalized.

2.54   Order of Authorities Within Each Signal (see BB Rule 1.4)

       Semicolons separate authorities within each signal. If one authority is more helpful or
       authoritative than the other authorities cited within the signal, it should precede the others
       regardless of BB Rule 1.4.

       In all other circumstances, cite the authorities according to BB Rule 1.4:

       (a)    Constitutions: federal, state (alphabetically by state), foreign (alphabetically by
              jurisdiction), foundational documents (e.g., United Nations, the European Union);
       (b)    Statutes;
       (c)    Treaties and other international agreements;
       (d)    Cases: arranged within a signal according to the courts issuing of the cited
              opinions. Cases decided by the same court are arranged in reverse chronological
              order;
       (e)    Legislative Materialsmaterials;
       (f)    Administrative and executive materials;
       (g)    Resolutions, decisions, and regulations of intergovernmental organizations;
       (h)    Records, briefs, and petitions;
       (i)    Secondary materials; and
       (j)    Cross- references to the author’s own text or footnotes.


a.            2.5.     Signals as Verbs in Footnote Textual Sentences                                   Formatted: No bullets or numbering




                                                                                                   3
      In textual sentences of a footnote of a footnote, you may use signals as verbs and
      incorporate the material that would otherwise be included in a blurb as part of the
      sentences include material that would otherwise be included in a blurb as part of the
      sentence. Never italicize signals that are used as verbs. No alteration to the format of the
      authority’s citation is necessary should you opt to use signals as verbs. When using this
      construction, note also that the standard restrictions on blurb style—e.g., the prohibitions
      laid out in Rule 3.2, below—do not apply.

      Example:
      See Steven Veenema, Note, Willful Ignorance ––
      Contextualizing U.S. Policy Toward the International
      Criminal Court, 30 Suffolk Transnat’l L. Rev. 167, 174-75
      (2007) (describing history of humanitarian tribunals).                                          Formatted: Underline


      Becomes:
      See Steven Veenema, Note, Willful Ignorance –
      Contextualizing U.S. Policy Toward the International
      Criminal Court, 30 Suffolk Transnat’l L. Rev. 167, 174-75
      (2007), for a description of ad hoc tribunals in Yugoslavia
      and Rwanda.


RULE 3: PARENTHETICAL PHRASES (BLURBS) (SEE BB RULE 1.5)

3.1   When Blurbs Are Required

      Blurbs are used to further explain textual assertions and provide information regarding
      the sources cited. Avoid simply repeating a textual assertion because blurbs are an
      opportunity to expand on a certain point. Blurbs are required whenever a signal is used
      unless:

      (a)    citing to the facts of the case-in-chief;
      (b)    citing a quote; or
      (c)    including a blurb would be repetitious of the textual assertion

      If in doubt, err on the side of caution and include a blurb.


3.2   Length and Style of Blurbs

      (a)    Blurbs must begin with a present participle, e.g., holding, criticizing, reasoning
             (see Appendix I for additional examples).

      (b)    Never use articles (“a,” “an,” “the”), the word “that,” or the verb “to be” in a
             blurb.




                                                                                                  4
      (c)    There is a space between the citation and the opening parenthesis of the blurb.

      (d)    The period goes outside the closing parenthesis.

      (e)    Blurbs should be no longer than 16 words.

             Example:
             See Dresser Industries, Inc. v. Eltra Corp., 432 F.
             Supp. 153 (N.D. Ohio 1978) (concluding inventors not
             entitled to patent benefits).


3.3   Blurbs in Lead Articles

        There is no word limit for the length of blurbs in lead articles. In addition, lead article
       authors are not strictly held to the use of a present participle at the beginning of a blurb.




RULE 4: PINPOINT CITES (SEE BB RULE 3)

4.1   When Pinpoint Cites Are Needed

      (a)    When the assertion comes from a particular page in the authority, you must
             indicate the pinpoint cite .

      (b)    Pinpoints are always required except when using see generally or when providing
             an Internet citation for an authority that is not in its original form.

             Examples:
             Silver v. Goodman, 234 F. Supp. 415, 417 (1st Cir.
             1997) (blurb).

             Frederick L. Trilling, The Strategic Application of
             Business Methods to the Practice of Law, 38 Washburn
             L.J. 13, 14-16 (1998) (blurb).


4.2   Pinpoint Cites for Parallel Cites

      A parallel citation is a citation that includes the authoritative source as well as additional
      information that corresponds to another location of the source. For example, a parallel




                                                                                                       5
      citation for a case would include the official reporter as well as another reporter. Parallel
      citations are only used occasionally.

      Even when you are including a parallel citation or short-citing, always include the
      pinpoint cite for each reporter or parallel cite. For Internet parallel cites, see TLR Rule
      13.1.

      Examples:
      Pupecki v. James Madison Corp., 376 Mass. 212, 217, 382
      N.E.2d 1030, 1033 (1978).

      Pupecki, 376 Mass. at 217, 382 N.E.2d at 1033.

      Id. at 217, 382 N.E.2d at 1033.


4.3   Page Numbers

      (a)    Give the page number(s) before the date parenthetical, without any introductory
             abbreviation.


             Example:
             Philip Bobbitt, Constitutional Interpretation 5 (1991)
      (b)    Only use “at” to set off page number(s) if they may be confused with another part
             of the citation or if the authority uses Roman numerals for pagination. Separate
             with a comma.

             Examples:
             H.R. Rep. No. 82-353, at 4-5 (1951).

             Biographical Directory of the Governors of the United
             States 1978-1983, at 257 (Robert Sobel & John W. Raimo
             eds., 1983).

             Thomas I. Emerson, Foreword to Catharine A. MacKinnon,
             Sexual Harassment of Working Women, at vii, ix (1979).

      (c)    When referring specifically to the first page of a source, repeat the page number.

             Example:
             Laura McCue, Note, Left Behind: The Failure of the
             United States to Fight for the Return of Victims of
             International Child Abduction, 28 Suffolk Transnat’l
             L. Rev. 85, 85 (2004).




                                                                                                    6
RULE 5: ID. (SEE BB RULE 4.1)

Once the author cites authority in full, the author may use a short citation form to subsequently
refer to the same authority. There are exceptions and restrictions, however, as to the use of id.
with certain types of authorities. Always check Bluebook Rule 4.1 to verify that id. is the
appropriate short citation form.

5.1    When to Use Id.

       Id. is used when the citation is exactly the same as the previous citation. You may only
       use id. when the prior footnote cites one authority. Otherwise, it will be unclear to which
       cite reference is being made.


       Incorrect:
       1.
          See New York v. Lipsitz, 663 N.Y.S.2d 468, 470 (S.D.N.Y.
       1997) (discussing complaints from other states); Emily
       Lanza, Personal Jurisdiction Based on Internet Contacts, 24
       Suffolk Transnat’l L. Rev. 125, 139 (2000) (noting
       alternative approach for attaching jurisdiction provides
       little protection).
       2.
          See id. at 475.

       Correct:
       1.
          See New York v. Lipsitz, 663 N.Y.S.2d 468, 470 (S.D.N.Y.
       1997) (discussing complaints from other states); Emily
       Lanza, Personal Jurisdiction Based on Internet Contacts, 24
       Suffolk Transnat’l L. Rev. 125, 139 (2000) (noting
       alternative approach for attaching jurisdiction provides
       little protection).
       2.
          See Lipsitz, 663 N.Y.S.2d at 475 (holding defendant
       subject to New York jurisdiction).

5.2    Id. and Cross- References

       Do not use id. when referring to an internal cross-reference.                                    Formatted: No underline


5.3    Capitalization of Id.

       Always capitalize id. when used in a citation sentence unless it is preceded by a signal.

       Examples:      See id. at 5.
                      Id.

5.4    Id. and Punctuation



                                                                                                    7
       Id. is an abbreviation of “idem” and thus always includes a period. This is true even
       though the citation sentence may continue after the period, even if additional punctuation
       may follow the period. Always underline the period of id., but never the additional
       punctuation that follows. Do not connect the underline between see and id.

       Examples:
       6
          See id. at 192 (arguing relationship with United Nations
       endows IFIs with legal obligation to respect U.N. Charter).
       7
          Id.
       . . .
       15
           Id.; see also Bob Woodward, Key in Afghanistan: Economy,
       Not Military, Wash. Post, July 1, 2009, at A1 (finding no
       purely military solution in Afghanistan).



RULE 6: SUPRA (SEE BB RULE 4.2)

Supra refers to information that has previously been discussed. It can be used as a short citation
or as an internal cross-reference. The distinction is very important because supra is one of the
most used citation forms. A supra short citation refers the reader to a cited authority in the
footnote where it first appears, whereas a supra internal cross-reference directs the reader to a
previous portion of the note or a previous footnote to support the stated proposition.


6.1    Supra in Short Citation Form (see BB Rules 4.2, 15.8.1(b) [books, pamphlets, etc.] &
       16.7(b) [periodicals])

       (a)     Supra is used to short-cite secondary sources such as books, newspapers,
               periodicals (including law reviews), and treaties once they have been cited in full.
               You cannot use supra to short-cite cases, statutes, or constitutions, except as
               allowed by BB Rule 4.2.

       (b)     The format of a supra short citation is: [signal, if applicable] the author’s last
               name (or title, if no author), supra note [footnote no. where full citation first
               appears], at pinpoint cite. Omit the word “at” where its use would be prohibited
               by BB Rule 3.3.

               Example:
               3
                 See Kirby, supra note 1, at 3 (acknowledging
               increasingly prominent role international law must
               play in constitutional jurisprudence).

       (c)     When the authority has already been cited in the same footnote—either in full or
               in short form—omit the footnote number. Include a pinpoint cite if the material
               cited appears on a page of the authority different from the original reference.



                                                                                                     8
             Example:
             7
               Kirby, supra note 1, at 2; see also Armand de Mestral
             & Evan Fox-Decent, Rethinking the Relationship Between
             International and Domestic Law, 53 McGill L.J. 573
             (2008) (analyzing role of international law in
             domestic Canadian legal decisions). Kirby
             acknowledges the increasingly prominent role
             international law must play in constitutional
             jurisprudence. Kirby, supra, at 3.

      (d)    Follow the same typeface as used in the original footnote.

             Example:
             1
               Malcolm N. Shaw, International Law 178 (5th ed. 2003)
             (stating Montevideo Convention establishes widely
             accepted standard for determining legal statehood).
             . . .
             7
               Shaw, supra note 1, at 180-81 (noting U.N. admission
             limited to “states”).

      (e)    Note that an actual parenthetical describing the supra short citation’s relevance to
             the footnote at issue – and not just the word blurb in parenthesis – is required.

6.2   Internal Cross-Reference

      Supra may be used as a cross-reference to refer to portions of text, footnotes and groups
      of authorities within the article. When referring to a specific part of the piece, separate
      with periods, not parentheses.

      When using supra as an internal cross-reference, use “and accompanying text” only when
      the citation refers to both the footnote and the text that corresponds to that footnote. Do
      not use “and accompanying text” when the supra refers only to what is written in the text
      of the footnote.

      Incorrect:
      See supra Part II(A)(2).

      Correct:
      See supra Part II.A.2.
      See supra notes 2-4 and accompanying text (blurb).

6.3   Supra to Supra

      (a)    You can use supra as an internal cross-reference to refer to a footnote that
             contains supra as a short citation.



                                                                                                    9
               Example:
               12
                  See Amnesty International, No One is Safe: Political
               Repression and Abuse of Power in the 1990s 85 (1996)
               [hereinafter No One Is Safe] (condemning extensive use
               of death penalty in China); see also Cohen, supra note
               2, at 535-36 (explaining reasons for death penalty as
               punishment); Davis, supra note 2, at 329 (indicating
               China’s historical use of capital punishment).
               ...
               73
                  See No One is Safe, supra note 12, at 93 (blurb).

       (b)     You cannot use supra to refer to a footnote that uses supra as an internal cross-
               reference. The reader should instead be referred to the footnote where the
               supporting authority originally appears.

               Example:
               10
                  See, e.g., Alison Mitchell, Democrats End United
               Support of Bush on War, N.Y. Times, May 17, 2000, at
               A1 (discussing foreign investment in Laos).
               11
                  See Mitchell, supra note 10 and accompanying text
               (discussing how formation of ASEAN affected foreign
               investment in Southeast Asia).


               Incorrect:
               12
                  See Mitchell, supra note 11 and accompanying text
               (blurb).

               Correct:
               12
                  See Mitchell, supra note 10 and accompanying text
               (analyzing impact of ASEAN’s formation on foreign
               investment market s of Southeast Asia).



RULE 7: INFRA (SEE BB RULE 3.5)

Infra refers to material that has not yet been discussed. Infra can only be used as an internal
cross-reference; it should never be used as a short citation form. You cannot use infra to refer
to another footnote that also uses infra or supra as an internal cross-reference.

7.1    How to Use Infra

       (a)     Infra should only be used as an internal cross-reference.




                                                                                                   10
      (b)    When referring to a particular section or discussion within a Note or other Law
             Review Article, use “note” or “part” to refer to other sections the same piece.

             Example:
             See infra Parts III-IV (analyzing territorial
             sovereignty of non-self governing territories).

      (c)    Do not infra to a full citation. If referring to a source for the first time, provide
             the full citation.

             Incorrect:
             1
                See infra note 15 and accompanying text (discussing
             big donors’ reluctance to aid North Korea).
             ...
             15
                 Howard W. French, Diplomatic Problems Stall Japanese
             Food Aid to North Korea, N.Y. Times, May 17, 2002, at
             A3 (suggesting North Korea faces food shortage).

      (d)    Do not connect the underline between see and infra/supra.


7.2   Infra to Infra, Supra

      Infra must never direct the reader to another internal cross-reference.

      Incorrect:
      7
         See infra note 15 and accompanying text (blurb).
      ...
      15
          See supra note 12 and accompanying text (blurb).


RULE 8: HEREINAFTER (SEE BB RULE 4.2)

(a)   Hereinafter is used when an authority would be too cumbersome to cite with a supra, or
      when the piece cites two works by the same author and supra would cause confusion.

(b)   The parenthetical or blurb follows “hereinafter.”

(c)   The shortened form should be in the same typeface as the original.

      Example:
      14
         International        Committee of the Red Cross, Commentary:
      Convention (IV)         Relative to the Protection of Civilian
      Persons in Time         of War 24 (Jean Pictet ed., 1960)
      [hereinafter GC         IV Commentary] (noting international



                                                                                                     11
      conventions as affair of governments, not of non-state
      actors).




RULE 9: CASES (SEE BB RULE 10)

9.1   Case Name Format (see BB Rule 10.2)

      The author should underline case names in the text, as well as in textual sentences in the
      footnotes when writing their piece. The full case name is in plain text when in a citation.


9.2   Court of Decision (see BB Rule 10.4 & 10.5)

      Unless it is obvious from the reporter, the court of decision and the date should be
      included in parentheses following the cite.


      Example:
      4
        United States v. San Francisco, 656 F. Supp. 278, 283
      (N.D. Cal. 1987) (blurb).

9.3   Federal District Court/Court of Appeals

      If the citation is to a Federal District Court or Court of Appeals, the name of the court
      must be included.

      Example:
      7
        Johnson v. Watts Regulator Co., 63 F.3d 1129 (1st Cir.
      1995) (blurb).


9.4   Abbreviation of Case Names (see BB Rule 10.2.1(c))

      (a)    The first word of each party should be spelled out if it is not a widely known
             acronym.

      (b)    Case names are never abbreviated in text except as provided in BB Rule 10.2.1.

      (c)    Omit the phrase “et al.” in case names (BB Rule 10.2.1(a)).

      (d)    United States is never abbreviated in the case name.




                                                                                                  12
9.5   Case Names in the Text (see BB Rule 10.2.1)

      If the case name is in the text, include a footnote immediately afterwards, but do not
      repeat the name in the footnote. You do not need to include a blurb following the
      citation. This is the only situation where you may insert a mid-sentence footnote.

      Example:
      In United States v. Jones,1 the court stated that the law
      does not allow a private right of action.2
      1
          187 F.3d 210, 212 (1st Cir. 1999).
      2
          Id. at 215 (blurb).


9.6   Subsequent History (see BB Rule 10.7)

      (a)    All subsequent history must be included every time you cite a case in full.

      (b)    Do not repeat the case name unless it has changed.

      (c)    If there are several decisions within the same year, include the year only in the
             last cited decision of that year.

      (d)    Blurbs precede the subsequent history.


9.7   Short Citation Form for Cases (see BB Rule 10.9)

      (a)    The short form of U.S. cases can vary, but the most common form is: Case Name,
             vol. reporter at pinpoint cite. Id. may also be used, if appropriate.

      (b)    Never use hereinafter to create the short form of a case name. Short form
             case names may only differ from the original party names under the
             circumstances provided in BB Rule 10.2.1(k).

             Incorrect Examples:
             1
               Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project, 130 S. Ct. 2705
             (2010) [hereinafter HLP]

             OR
             1
               Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project (HLP), 130 S. Ct.
             2705 (2010).
             . . .
             3
               HLP, 130 S. Ct. at 2720.




                                                                                                 13
               Correct Example:
               1
                 Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project, 130 S. Ct. 2705
               (2010).
               . . .
               3
                 Humanitarian Law Project, 130 S. Ct. at 2720.

       (c)     Remember that although the case name is not underlined in a full cite, the
               case name should be underlined when in short form.

       (d)     You cannot use the short form if you have not cited the case in full or in short
               form (including id.) within the preceding five (5) footnotes. See BB Rule 10.9(a).


9.8    Cases from Foreign Jurisdictions

       For cases from courts outside of the United States, please refer to BB Rule 20.3 and T2
       for the specific citation format.

       There is no uniform system for short-citing cases from foreign jurisdictions. Please ask
       the Chief Managing Editor for precise instructions should the need to short-cite a foreign
       case arise.


RULE 10: INTERNATIONAL CASES (COMPARE BB RULE 21.5)

       Transnational’s citation format for international cases differs substantially from the
format described in the Bluebook. Please pay close attention to the rules below.

10.1   International Court of Justice and Permanent Court of International Justice
       Decisions (compare BB Rule 21.5.1)

       These decisions should be cited as follows:

       Name of Case (Name of Countries Involved), Title of Document if relevant, Vol. and
       Name of Publication Where Item is Found, the Page or Case Number, Pincite (Date).

       Examples:
       Rights of Nationals of the U.S. in Morocco (U.S. v. Fr.),
       1952 I.C.J. 176, 222 (Aug. 27).

       Société Commerciale de Belgique (Belg. v. Greece),
       Judgment, 1939 P.C.I.J. (ser. A/B) No. 78, at 6 (June 15).

       N.B. The citation should include the official title of the document, if relevant, and not
       merely its general description. Spelling within the title of the document should be
       maintained. See Rule 18.5, below.




                                                                                                   14
10.2   International Criminal Court and International Criminal Tribunal Decisions
       (compare BB Rule 21.5.7)

       These decisions—along with those from other tribunals listed in 21.5.7—should be cited
       as follows:

       Name of Case, Title of Order/Document Cited, Pincite, Case No., (Name of Tribunal [if
       unclear] Date of Order Cited).

       Examples:
       Prosecutor v. Tadić, Judgement in Sentencing Appeals, ¶ 41,
       Case No. IT-94-1-A and IT-94-1-Abis (Int’l Crim. Trib. for
       the former Yugoslavia Jan. 26, 2000).

       Prosecutor v. Delalić (Čelebići Camp), Appeals Chamber
       Judgement, ¶ 23, Case No. IT-96-21-A (Int’l Crim. Trib. for
       the former Yugoslavia Feb. 20, 2001).

       N.B. The citation includes the official title of the document and not merely its type.
       Spelling within the title of the document should be maintained. See Rule 18.5, below.


10.3   Short Citation Form for International Cases

       (a)     For cases cited under 10.1, the short form should read as follows:

               Name, Document if relevant, Vol. and Publication at Pincite (blurb, if applicable).

       (b)     For cases cited under 10.2, the short form should read as follows:

               Name, Document Cited, Pincite, Case Number (blurb, if applicable).

       (c)     When the case is known by an alternate name, you may use that name in your
               short form so long as it was included in the full citation.

               Using the above case as an example:
               Čelebići Camp, Appeals Chamber Judgement, ¶ 23, Case
               No. IT-96-21-A.


RULE 11: INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION (SEE BB RULE 21.6)

When citing to an international arbitration, if the parties are named, provide the names as if the
arbitration were a court case. Otherwise, cite by the name of the first-party plaintiff or by the




                                                                                                 15
subject matter, if no name is given. Indicate parenthetically the countries involved, if not
otherwise evident.

       Example:
       N. Atl. Coast Fisheries (U.K. v. U.S.), R. Int’l Arb.
       Awards 167, 196 (Perm. Ct. Arb. 1910).


Cite arbitration awards to the official source, if possible, unless that source is a pamphlet
containing only a single judgment. Unless the court or tribunal is identified unambiguously in
the name of the reporter, it should be indicated parenthetically:

       Examples:
           Amoco Int’l Fin. Corp. v. Iran, 15 Iran-U.S. Cl. Trib.
             Rep. 189 (1987).
           Massaut v. Stupp, 9 Trib. Arb. Mixtes 316 (Ger.-Belg.
             1929).
           Savarkar (Fr. v. Gr. Brit.), Hague Ct. Rep. (Scott)
             275 (Perm. Ct. Arb. 1911).


When citing to an arbitration reporter, cite the reporter according to BB T.5 when possible. Note
the case number and the type of document. The date should appear with the month and the date
of the document.

       Examples:
           Feldman      v. Mexico, ICSID (W. Bank) Case No. ARB/99/01, Award (Dec.
                 16, 2002).
                EnCana Corp. v. Republic of Ecuador, LCIA Case No. UN 3481, 11 C 91,
                 Merits, para. 170 (Feb. 3, 2006).
                Bechtel Enter. Int'l (Bermuda) Ltd. v. Overseas Private Inv. Corp.,
                 AAA Case No. 50 TI95 00509 02, Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law
                 and Award, para. 1(c) (Sept. 3, 2003).




RULE 12: PERIODICALS (SEE BB RULE 16)

12.1   Formatting

       (a)       The author’s name is in plain text.

       (b)       The title should be underlined.

       (c)       The name of the publication should be in bold.




                                                                                                 16
12.2   Citing Lead Articles in Law Reviews

       The citation includes the author, title of the article, volume of the publication, name of
       the publication (abbreviated according to Bluebook Tables), page number on which the
       article begins, pinpoint cite, and date.

       Example:
       Steven C. Kiernan, Extradition of a Convicted Killer, 24
       Suffolk Transnat’l L. Rev. 353, 369 (2001) (explaining
       prohibition of double jeopardy related to person’s
       fundamental rights).


12.3   Citing Student Works in Law Reviews

       The citation includes the author, type of work (Note, Book Review, Survey, Comment),
       title of the article, volume of the publication, name of the publication (abbreviated
       according to BB Tables), page number on which the article begins, pinpoint cite, and
       date.


       Example:
       Corey Winer, Note, Smoke ‘Em Out: U.S. Counterterrorist
       Mishaps Necessitating the Expansion of INTERPOL’s
       Capabilities to Meet the New Terrorist Threat, 33 Suffolk
       Transnat’l L. Rev. 145 (2010) (blurb).



RULE 13: BOOKS AND NONPERIODIC MATERIALS (SEE BB RULE 15)

The basic form for citing books is: author, title, page, edition (if more than one exists), year of
publication.

The author’s name and title should be in bold.

       Example:
       See Christina Sganga, El Salvador: Reign of Terror 35-50
       (1990).

Editor, translator, and other components may be required depending on the source. Please refer
to the Bluebook if in doubt.

The publisher should only be included when the book is available from more than one publisher.




                                                                                                      17
  RULE 14: INTERNET SOURCES (SEE BB RULE 18.2)

14.1   Basic Citation Principles

       Information available in traditional printed format or on a widely available commercial database should be
       cited to that source rather than to the Internet.

       An Internet citation should only be provided only when:

       1)      The source is unavailable in a traditional printed format or on a widely available commercial
               database.

               Examples:
               Budylin & Yulia Osipova, Is AllofMP3 Legal? Non-contractual
               Licensing Under Russian Copyright Law, 7 J. High Tech. L. 1, 3
               (2007),
               http://www.jhtl.org/docs/ pdf/Budylin_article.pdf

               [JHTL only publishes on the Internet]

       2)      The source is available in traditional printed format, but the content of the Internet source is
               identical to that of the printed version and a parallel citation to the Internet (introduced by the
               explanatory phrase “available at”) will substantially improve access to the source cited.

               N.B. The phrase “substantially improve access” is not clearly defined. Discretion must therefore
               be used as to what would substantially improve access. Providing the internet citation for a New
               York Times article that also appears online would not substantially improve access because the
               New York Times is already widely available. Providing an internet citation, however, for an article
               that does not appear in a well-known printed source would be appropriate. Meanwhile, a parallel
               internet citation to an official report or treaty in Adobe’s portable document format (.pdf) always
               improves access to the document.

               Example:
               Am. Mining Congress v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, No.
               CIV.A.93-1754-SSH (D.D.C. Jan. 23, 1997), available at
               http://www.wetlands.com/fed/tulloch1.htm (highlighting Congress’
               passage of Clean Water Act).

       3)      If the material is found exclusively on the Internet, do not use the explanatory phrase “available
               at.”

       4)      Where available, cite to a format that preserves the original pagination and attributes of the printed
               work, such as Adobe’s portable document format (.pdf), in lieu of citing to an HTML document.
               See BB Rule 18.2.1(c).

       5)      Do not underline the website address.

       6)      Never cite to Internet sources of questionable authority, including Wikipedia.

       7)      Avoid using a proliferation of Internet sources, as an abundance of URLs
               throughout one’s footnotes detracts from the professionalism of the material.

14.2   Direct Citations




                                                                                                                     18
       (a)      When citing directly to an Internet source that has a clear analogue in printed medium, use the
                typeface you would use in citing the printed source.

                Example:
                Taiwan Affairs Office & Information Office, The Taiwan Question
                and Reunification of China (1993),
                http://www.china.org.cn/e-white/taiwan/ (blurb).

                [source only available on Internet and clearly resembles a report (BBR 15)]

       (b)      If there is no clear analogue, treat the source as unpublished and cite using plain text.

                Example:
                Organization of American States, OAS History at a Glance (Sept.
                2006), http://www.oas.org/key%5Fissues/eng/(blurb).


14.3   Date of Internet Citations

       If the citation is only to an Internet source, a date must be provided, before the URL in the case of an online
       journal and after the URL in all other cases. The nature of the date provided should be stated in the date
       parenthetical.

       The date provided should be one of the following, in order of preference:

       1)       the date of the case, statute, article, or other material as specified in the information itself;

       2)       the date the Internet site was last modified, using the terminology chosen by the Internet provider;
                or

       3)       the date the Internet site was last visited to confirm the presence and location of the information.

       Never use “last visited” for a dated authority.

       Examples:
       Jacques Morisset & Olivier Lumenga Neso, Administrative Barriers to
       Foreign Investment in Developing Countries,
       http://econ.worldbank.org/files/15291_wps2848.pdf (May 2002)
       (describing administrative costs related to operational procedures in
       developing countries).

       CatsInfo.com, Cat Facts, http://www.catsinfo.com/ catfacts.html (last
       visited April 27, 2007) (noting cats sleep average of sixteen hours
       each day).


14.4   Parenthetical Information

       (a)      Explanatory or quotation parentheticals should follow the entire citation, including the URL.

       (b)      A parallel citation introduced by “available at” should follow format-related parenthetical
                information (such as “on file with author,” “unpublished manuscript,” “emphasis added,” or
                “internal quotation marks omitted”) and related authority parentheticals (such as “citing” or
                “quoting”).

                Examples:




                                                                                                                    19
                Human Rights Watch, The Invisible Exodus: North Koreans in the
                People’s Republic of China 17 (2002), available at
                http://www.hrw.org/reports/2002/ northkorea/norkkor1102.pdf
                (explaining how treaty obligates Chinese to repatriate North
                Koreans)

                Tenn. Comp. R. & Regs. ch. 1200-1-2 (1999), available at
                http://www.state.tn.us/sos/rules/1200/1200-history.pdf (providing
                regulations for rental premises unfit for habitation).

                Polly J. Price, Precedent and Judicial Power After the Founding,
                42 B.C. L. Rev. 81, 84 (2000) (emphasis added) (citing Guido
                Calabresi, A Common Law for the Age of Statutes 4 (1982)),
                available at http://www.bc.edu/schools/law/lawreviews/meta-
                elements/journals/bclawr/42_1/02_FMS.htm (discussing precedent in
                context of statutory construction).


14.5   Pinpoint Citations

       A .pdf file displays the information in the same form as the original as a “virtual” document. Where the
       information is in the same format as a traditional source, the pinpoint citation rules for that source should
       be used.

       Example:
       New York State Comm’n of Corr., Jail Time Manual: A Handbook for Local
       Correctional Administrators 2 (May 1998), available at
       http://www.scoc.state.ny.us/nysscoc/jtm1.pdf.

       The .html format usually cannot accommodate pinpoint citations unless there is a table of contents or other
       internal reference that permits relative specificity in the citation. “Screen page” or similar citations should
       not be used because the length of a screen page can vary according to the user’s software and monitor
       specifications.


14.6   Weblogs

       When a blog posting has a unique permanent URL, cite as an unpublished Internet source, using at to
       indicate the name of the blog.

       Example:
       Jack Balkin, The Party of Fear, the Party Without a Spine, and the
       National Surveillance State, at Balkinization (Aug. 5,
       2007), http://balkin.blogspot.com/2007/08/party-of-fear-party-without-
       spine-and.html (blurb).

       When the blog posting does not have a permanent URL, follow Rule 18.2.4.


14.7   Preservation of Information

       An accurate URL does not guarantee that the information can be readily accessed by the user.
       Downloading, printing, or otherwise preserving the information as it exists at the time of access is therefore
       required. The location of the archival copy should be indicated by a parenthetical.

       Example:




                                                                                                                    20
       http://www.nato.int/docu/pr/2002/p02-012e.htm (on file with the North
       Atlantic Treaty Organization).




RULE 15: PRESS RELEASE CITATION (SEE BB RULE 17.1.3)

When citing unpublished materials, including press releases, identify the writer and addressee (if
any) by name, institution, and title. Include the date of the press release and indicate who has the
memorandum, including a web address where available. If possible, the press release must cite
to Adobe’s portable document format (.pdf) over HTML format. As noted above in Rule 14, this
is the general requirement for all citations to online documents. See BB Rule 18.2.1(c).

       Example:
       Press Release, North Atlantic Treaty Org., NATO Sends Extra
       AWACS to Help Guard Skies of America (Jan. 16, 2002),
       available at http://www.nato.int/docu/pr/2002/p02-003e.htm
       (blurb).




RULE 16: PRINTING CODES

16.1   Generally

       The printing codes in this supplement will not be found in the Bluebook. These are codes
       we use in our drafts to specify typeface for the printing company.


16.2   Italics  Underline

       You must underline any word or phrase that the Bluebook says should be italicized. The
       student author’s name at the end of a piece should be underlined. Place punctuation
       outside the code.

       Under Bluebook Rule 16.2, when a title contains a reference to material that would be
       italicized, the reference should appear in ordinary roman type:

       Example:
       Seth F. Kreimer, Does Pro-Choice Mean Pro-Kevorkian? An Essay on Roe, Casey and
       the Right to Die, 44 AM. U. L. REV. 803, 812 (1995).
            Notice ‘Roe’ and ‘Casey’ are case names that would normally be italicized. In
               the title, however, they appear in ordinary roman type.




                                                                                                 21
16.3    Large and Small Capitals  Bold

        You must bold print any word or phrase that the Bluebook says should appear in large
        and small capitals.

        Example:
        24 Suffolk Transnat’l L. Rev. 149 (2000).


16.4    Block Quote Code

        Use a block quote when quoting more than fifty words. To identify an indented quote,
        type “=xt” on a line by itself before the quote. End the quote with “=ft” on a line by
        itself. It should look like this (also include the triple spacing):

        Example:
        =xt
        Any quoted text exceeding fifty words in length must be
        block-quoted, not indented, and not offset by quotation
        marks. (Pretend this text includes twenty-five more words!)
        =ft

RULE 17: SPACING
17.1    Periods

        Always leave TWO spaces after a period, whether in a textual sentence or citation.


17.2    Other Punctuation

        Always leave ONE space after a colon, semi-colon, or comma.


17. 3   Symbols

        Always leave ONE space after “§” and “¶.”


17.4    Hyphens, En Dashes, and Em Dashes

        Leave NO space between the hyphen or dash and the words or clauses it connects.


17.5    Reporters and Abbreviations (see BB Rule 6.1 and T.7)

        Leave NO space between single capitals and numbers, but ONE space in all other circumstances.

        No Space Examples:                                   One Space Examples:
        S.W.2d                                               D. Mass.




                                                                                                        22
       F.2d                                                      F. Supp.
       E.D.N.Y.                                                  S. Ct.
                                                                 B.C. L. REV.

17.6   Ellipses

       (a)        When used in the middle of text, the ellipsis should have one space before and after each of the
                  three periods.

       (b)     When used to end a sentence, the ellipsis should contain a fourth period. There
       should be no space between the fourth period and the closing quotation mark.

                  Example:
                  The First Amendment of the United States Constitution states in
                  pertinent part that “Congress shall make no law respecting an
                  establishment of religion . . . or abridging the freedom of
                  speech . . . .”

       (c)        Never start a sentence or quotation with an ellipsis. Instead, change the case of the first letter by
                  placing it in brackets to indicate that you have modified the original.



RULE 18: STYLE

18.1   Hyphenation

       The following prefixes should not be hyphenated:

                  pre     post over under sub          super pro                   anti co
                  intra extra infra ultra un           non   semi                  supra pseudo
                  re (unless the word begins with “e”)

       The following words should be hyphenated:

                  case-in-chief by-product             fact-finding       out-of-state
                  out-of-home well-being               on-site            eleven-year-old

       For further guidance, refer to Chicago Manual of Style hyphen table.


18.2   Foreign Words (see BB Rule 7(b))

       Foreign words should be italicized if they have not been assimilated into common
       English usage. Latin words are generally viewed as being in common use.

       The following words should not be italicized:

       ad hoc                       de novo                      pro se
       amicus brief                 en banc                      quid pro quo




                                                                                                                      23
       certiorari            etc.                   res ipsa loquitur
       coup d’état           ex parte               sua sponte
       de facto              per se                 sui generis
       de jure               post hoc               vice versa
       de minimis            prima facie            voir dire


18.3   Paragraphs

       A paragraph must contain at least three (3) sentences; but no more than six (6).


18.4   Quotations/Quotation Marks (see BB Rule 5)

       (a)    Place punctuation INSIDE the quotation marks unless the punctuation was not
              from the original quotation. Note that commas and periods should always be
              placed inside quotation marks.

       (b)    A quotation should never start with an ellipsis. Instead, use brackets to change
              the case of the first letter.

       (c)    Block quotes are for quotes of fifty or more words. They should be triple-spaced
              and the margins should NOT be indented.


18.5   Spelling

       Many of the sources used by Transnational authors—as well as the authors themselves—
       may use British English spelling (e.g., behaviour, favour, judgement). These spellings
       should be converted to the American English spelling unless:

       (a)    they are within directly quoted text; or
       (b)    they are within the case name or title of a source.

              Example:
              In the appeals judgment, the International Criminal
              Tribunal for Rwanda concluded that cumulative charging
              is permissible and thus not a supportable ground for
              appeal.15
              15
                Prosecutor v. Musema, Appeals Chamber Judgement, ¶¶
              369-370, Case No. ICTR-96-13-A (Nov. 16, 2001).


18.6   Use of Symbols (see BB Rules 3.3, 6.2)




                                                                                                 24
       (a)    Para. vs. ¶ (a/k/a the pilcrow, the paragraph sign)

              Use the abbreviation “para.” when citing a source that uses indented, unnumbered
              paragraphs. If the source uses numbered paragraphs, use “¶.” For example, most
              U.N. reports use numbered paragraphs whereas U.S. cases typically do not.
              When citing to multiple paragraphs, use “paras.” or “¶¶.”

              Example:
              The Declaration of Independence para. 2 (U.S. 1776).

              Dep’t of Econ. & Soc. Affairs of U.N. Secretariat,
              World Population Prospects: The 2008 Revision, ¶¶ 2-3,
              U.N. Doc. ESA/P/WP.210 (2009).

              But:
              U.N. Charter art. 2, para. 4.

       (b)    Sec. vs. § (a/k/a the sectional symbol)

              Use the abbreviation “sec.” only when citing session laws amending prior acts. In
              all other instances, use the sectional symbol. When citing to multiple sections,
              use “secs.” or “§§.”

              Examples:
              15 U.S.C. § 78dd-1 (2006).

              Labor-Management Relations Act, ch. 120, sec. 101, §
              8(a)(3), 61 Stat. 136, 140-41 (1947).

       (c)    Never use “at” when citing to a particular section or paragraph, regardless of
              whether you are using the abbreviation or the symbol.

       (d)    Never start a sentence with a symbol.



RULE 19: CAPITALIZATION

19.1   Generally (see BB Rule 8)

       In a title, the first word in a sentence, a word following a colon after a formally
       introduced independent clause, and all other words should be capitalized. The exceptions
       to this rule are articles, conjunctions, and prepositions of four or fewer letters; none of
       those words should be capitalized. Note that when a colon is used within a textual
       sentence, the first word after the colon is not capitalized unless it is a proper name. See
       Chicago Manual of Style Rule 6.64. This is an important distinction.




                                                                                               25
       Quick Capitalization Rules:
           Constitution when used as a proper noun, e.g., the U.S. Constitution, but not
              references to a constitution generally
           President specifically, but not generally
           Executive when referring to President, but not to executive branch
           Congress or Congressional when referring to U.S. only, but not generally
           Act when referring to a specific act previously named

       Refer to the Chicago Manual of Style for additional capitalization rules.

19.2   Court (see BB Rule 7(b))

       Generally, the word “court” is not capitalized except in the following instances:

       (1)    When referring to the [United States] Supreme Court, Court should be capitalized.



              Incorrect Example:
              The decision of the Massachusetts Court in Boston
              University v. Smith . . .

              Correct Example:
              The decision of the Court in Marbury v. Madison . . .

       (2)    When the full name of the court is used, “court” should be capitalized.

              Example:
              The United States Court of Appeals for the First
              Circuit . . .
              The Federal District Court for the District of
              Massachusetts . . .

       (3)    When referring to the circuit court, capitalize “Circuit” and the number, but only
              when they are used together.

              Incorrect Example:
              This Circuit has not addressed the issue.

              Correct Example:
              The First Circuit has not addressed the issue of
              whether the federal act preempts state regulatory law.




                                                                                               26
RULE 20: ABBREVIATIONS (SEE BB RULE 6.1)

     (a)   Avoid abbreviations not in the Bluebook unless the author will save substantial
           space and the abbreviation is not ambiguous. See Tables at the end of the
           Bluebook.

     (b)   Abbreviate United States and United Nations as “U.S.” and “U.N.” only when
           used as adjectives.

     (c)   Abbreviate months in footnotes according to T.13. Do not abbreviate months in
           the text, footnote text, or blurbs.

     (d)   Explanatory phrases for prior or subsequent history. See T.9.



RULE 21: TAGGING NAMES

     (a)   Only tag names that may be ambiguous or lengthy.

     (b)   Generally, do not tag surnames.

     (c)   Do not put quotes around the tagged name.

           Incorrect Example:
           Bowen’s Landing Corporation (“Bowen’s”)

           Correct Example:
           Bowen’s Landing Corporation (Bowen’s)

     (d)   The tagged name must first appear in the body of the text and then be retagged in
           the text of the footnotes.




RULE 22: NUMBERING (SEE BB RULE 6.2)

     (a)   Spell out whole numbers from one through one hundred and always spell out
           larger numbers that begin a sentence. Omit the comma for numbers containing
           fewer than five digits.

           Example:
           The factory is estimated to burn 2000 tons of coal
           every two months, resulting in 12,000 tons burned
           every year.




                                                                                             27
(b)   Round whole numbers greater than one hundred may be spelled out at an author’s
      discretion.

      Examples:
      Two hundred thousand people are estimated to have
      observed the lunar event, which occurs every one
      thousand years.

      The lunar event drew 200,000 people.

(c)   Fractions are expressed in numerals, with zero appearing before the decimal
      point, unless it begins a sentence. Follow any of the exceptions listed under
      Chicago Manual of Style Rule 9.21, e.g., for batting averages. Percentages are
      expressed in numerals with the % symbol, unless the percentage begins a
      sentence.

      Examples:
      The average number of children born to college
      graduates dropped from 2.3 to 0.95 per couple.

      Ty Cobb’s batting average was .367.

      Only 15% of the local electorate voted. Sixty-five
      percent of those who voted, however, listed security
      as their chief concern.

(d)   Extremely large whole numbers (more than one million) are expressed by a mix
      of numerals and spelled out numbers. Whole numbers should be used unless
      precision is explicitly required by the context of the article.

      Examples: 5 billion or 2.3 million but 3,253,197.

(e)   All monetary amounts are expressed in numerals up to $1 million and then in a
      mix of numerals and spelled-out numbers, unless the monetary amount begins a
      sentence.

      Examples:
      $15 and $999,999 but $1 million and $5.7 billion.

      Twenty-five dollars: that is the price Professor X
      estimates most U.S. consumers will pay for a gallon of
      gasoline in the year 2035.




                                                                                       28
RULE 23: LEAD ARTICLES

Generally, all the above rules equally pertain to Lead Articles, EXCEPT:

       (a)    Every sentence need not be footnoted. If the sentence refers to an authority and
              the author has not provided a footnote, then the cite-checker must provide the
              footnote according to the rules. If the sentence is the author’s own assertion, then
              the footnote may be omitted.

       (b)    Every footnote does not have to begin with a citation.

       (c)    Every sentence in the text of the footnote does not require a citation.

       (d)    Sentences may contain more than one footnote.

       (e)    Paragraphs may contain more than six sentences.




APPENDIX I: SUGGESTED BLURB PARTICIPLES

according                           declining                           opining
accounting for                      deferring                           outlining
acknowledging                       defining                            overturning
addressing                          delineating                         pointing to
admitting                           demonstrating                       portraying
admonishing                         denying                             predicting
adopting                            describing                          presuming
advocating                          detailing                           preventing
affirming                           determining                         proffering
alleging                            developing                          prohibiting
allowing                            disagreeing                         proscribing
alluding to                         discussing                          providing
analyzing                           dismissing                          qualifying
announcing                          distinguishing                      quantifying
applying                            eliminating                         questioning
approving                           elucidating                         reaffirming
arguing                             employing                           realizing
articulating                        enhancing                           reasoning
ascribing                           evaluating                          recalling
asserting                           evincing                            recognizing
assuming                            examining                           reconsidering
balancing                           excerpting                          refusing
barring                             excluding                           reiterating
cautioning                          explaining                          rejecting




                                                                                               29
characterizing                        exposing                          relying
circumventing                         expounding                        remanding
citing                                finding                           requiring
clarifying                            focusing                          reversing
codifying                             forbidding                        reviewing
commenting                            granting                          seeking
comparing                             guaranteeing                      setting forth
concluding                            highlighting                      stating
condemning                            holding                           stipulating
considering                           indicating                        stressing
constituting                          introducing                       striking
contending                            justifying                        subjecting
contesting                            leaving open                      suggesting
contrasting                           listing                           summarizing
creating                              maintaining                       tracing
criticizing                           making                            treating
debating                              noting                            upholding
deciding                              observing                         usurping
declaring                             offering                          vacating

APPENDIX II: COMMON MISSTEPS

        While we encourage all Transnational authors to be as stylistically creative as they
choose, we are still an academic publication and our pieces must reflect that. We ask that you
avoid these common missteps, below.


1.     Writing in the first person.

2.     Fancy footwork phrases. Words like “heretofore,” “albeit,” “wherefore,” “whereas”,
       “aforesaid,” “herein,” “hence,” “clearly,” “certainly,” “such,” and “said” (e.g., said
       statement) should appear sparsely within your piece, if at all.

3.     Very.

4.      “There is,” “there are,” and “it is.”

5.     The Passive Voice. Wherever possible, the author should use the active voice for verbs.
       Passive sentences consist of forms of the verb “to be” plus the past participle of the main
       verb. The object precedes the passive voice verb, which becomes intransitive (e.g., the
       dog was walked by Mike). The active voice, however, follows a subject-verb-object
       sequence (e.g., Mike walked the dog).

       N.B. A passive construction may be appropriate, however, if the author does not know or
       does not want to emphasize the actor/subject, if the object of the sentence is more
       important than the actor, or if the actor is obvious from the verb.




                                                                                                 30
6.    Misusing commas. Please consult the Chicago Manual of Style for guidance.

7.    Run-on sentences.

8.    Verbal redundancies. These include phrases like “past memories” and “true facts.”

9.    Sentences that begin with a conjunction (“and,” “but,” “or,” and “because”).

10.   Sentences that begin with “however.” “However” must relate to something other than
      itself. Example: “However, Jones called in sick again.” vs. “Jones, however, called in
      sick again.” (Check The Elements of Style, Strunk and White, on pages 48 – 49.)

11.   Contractions.

12.   Semi-colons.

13.   Split infinitives. Never write, for example, “to not have.” The rare exception is when
      using an adverb to modify your infinitive, in which case you may split if it would
      otherwise make the sentence awkward or if special emphasis should be placed on the
      adverb (e.g., “to boldly go where no man has gone before”).
14.   Nominalization of verbs. Typically, you can identify nominalizations by the ending of
      the word (e.g., “-ment”, “-ion”, “-ent”, “-ance”). Convert the noun back into a verb
      wherever possible.

15.   Parentheses.

16.   Where vs. When. “Where” denotes place. “When” denotes time.

17.   And/or.

18.   Since vs. Because. “Since” denotes time. “Because” denotes a causal relationship.

19.   Because vs. Due to. “Because” denotes a causal relationship. “Due to” refers to a
      monetary transaction.

20.   That vs. Which. “That” is a defining, restrictive pronoun. Clauses beginning with “that”
      are not offset by commas because the information adds essential meaning to the sentence
      as a whole. “Which” is a nondefining, nonrestrictive pronoun. Clauses beginning with
      “which” must be preceded by a comma because the information they contain is not
      necessary to the meaning of the sentence.

21.   Affect vs. Effect. “Affect” as a verb means “to influence.” “Effect” as a verb means “to
      bring about.” “Effect” is also commonly used as a noun, meaning “result.”

22.   Principle vs. Principal. “Principle” is only ever a noun, meaning a rule or truth. On the
      other hand, “principal” is both a noun and an adjective. As an adjective, it means chief or



                                                                                               31
        primary. As a noun, it means primary actor, or person who runs a school.

23.     Impact. Impact as a verb means to pack together firmly or to strike forcefully. It does
        not mean to have an effect on, as it is commonly misused. If you are talking about an
        influence or an effect, you must use impact as a noun.

24.     Misused Adverbs. Courts do not rely “heavily” but rely “primarily” or “exclusively.”

25.     Ducking Adverbs. “It was apparently snowing.”




APPENDIX III: TITLES AND HEADINGS

      A. HEADINGS IN TRANSNATIONAL NOTES AND LEAD ARTICLES

              TITLE:                    ALL CAPS, BOLD, CENTERED
                                             (Should appear Bold and All Caps in Drafts)
              HEADING I:                I. LARGE & SMALL CAPS, CENTERED
                                             (Should appear Bold in Drafts)
              HEADING II:               A. Sentence Case, Italics, Centered
                                             (Should appear Underlined in Drafts)
              HEADING III:              1. Sentence Case, Italics, Left Justified
                                             (Should appear Underlined in Drafts)
              HEADING IV:               a. Sentence Case, Plain Text, Left Justified.
                                             (Should appear in Plain text in Drafts)

Below is an example of how headings should appear in every note or lead article draft submitted
to TLR:

      UNITED STATES AND UNITED KINGDOM: EVALUATING THE JUDICIAL
           REVIEW OF GOVERNMENT’S POWER TO DECLARE WAR.

                                         I. Introduction

                                      A. The United States

1. Unbridled Use of Power by the President in the Face of Countervailing Judicial Decisions




                                                                                                  32
2. Attempts to Curb Executive Power and Judicial Indifference

                                    B. The United Kingdom

         II. Historical Perspectives: Judicial Review of the Power to Declare War


Below is an example of how those headings will appear when the piece is ultimately published in
TLR:

    UNITED STATES AND UNITED KINGDOM: EVALUATING THE JUDICIAL
        REVIEW OF THE GOVERNMENT’S POWER TO DECLARE WAR.

                                       I. INTRODUCTION

                                     A. The United States

  1. Unbridled Use of Power by the President in the Face of Countervailing Judicial Decisions

   B. TITLES IN TRANSNATIONAL CASE COMMENTS

The anatomy of a Case Comment title should be as follows:

  [Subject Area, in Bold and ALL CAPS]—[Title of Comment, in Bold to signal Large-Small
     Caps]—[Case Name, Underlined to signal Italics, reporter information in plain font].


Below is an example of how your title should appear in every case comment draft submitted to
TLR:

  INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS—Corporate Liability Claims Not Actionable
 Under the Alien Tort Statute—Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., 621 F.3d 111 (2d Cir.
                                        2010).


Below is an example of how the title will appear when the comment is ultimately published in
TLR:

 INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS—CORPORATE LIABILITY CLAIMS NOT ACTIONABLE
UNDER THE ALIEN TORT STATUTE—Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., 621 F.3d 111 (2d Cir.
                                      2010).




                                                                                               33
APPENDIX IV: ENDNOTES AND CROSS-REFERENCING

                                  Endnotes and Cross-Referencing
The Cross-Reference Function is one of the most useful computer features for law review writers, one that
Transnational requires its members to use. The cross-reference tool places an invisible target at one footnote and a
reference at another so that the second footnote can keep track of the first. The main use of this function is to mark a
source footnote. Another use is to keep track of a discussion in the article that is referred to elsewhere.

During the writing process, this feature will keep track of supra and infra footnotes as you
inevitably delete and add footnotes to your piece. Thus, you will not need to change the footnote
reference number every time you add or delete a footnote. Instead, the footnote number to which
the reader is directed will automatically change to the new footnote number.

The procedure for cross-referencing follows:

                                                Inserting Endnotes
                 In Microsoft Word, go to the References Tab and choose “Insert Endnote” from
                  the Footnotes box.
                 Once you have inserted your first endnote, click the expand button in the lower
                  right corner of the Footnotes box. In the dialogue box, choose “Endnotes,”
                  making certain the drop-down box next to it is set to “End of Document.”
                 Change the “Number Format” option to “1, 2, 3…” Make sure to start at 1.
                 Click “Apply.” The endnotes’ format should update automatically.

Cross-Referencing Supras and Infras




                                                                                                                    34
   Once you’ve started writing, find the first cross-reference or supra short citation
    in your endnotes and highlight the footnote number following supra or infra to be
    cross-referenced.

    Example:
    7
      Harrison, supra note 16 (outlining features of carbon sinks in existence).

   Go to the References Tab and in the Captions box, click “Cross-Reference.”
   Select “Endnote” as the Reference Type and “Endnote Number” in the Insert
    Reference To field. In the large box below, highlight the footnote that
    corresponds to the reference, and click “Insert.” Leave the window open to repeat
    this process until all references have been cross-referenced.


   Important: As you insert and delete footnotes, the footnote numbers will change
    automatically but the text will not. To correct this, select your entire endnote
    section (Ctrl + A) and hit F9. Choose “OK.” This will update all of the cross-
    references within the text of the footnotes. Remember to update frequently as you
    revise your piece!




                                                                                     35
                                TRANSNATIONAL BLUEBOOK QUIZ

        This test is to assess your ability to find and apply relevant Bluebook rules. All citation formats
should follow the white pages in the Bluebook, not the blue pages. Assume all page numbers and years
are correct. If there is information missing that is necessary for a correct citation, indicate what is
missing. You may indicate the correct typeface for each citation by following Bluebook Rule 2.1 (the
first convention) or by using the Transnational Law Review printing codes. For the purposes of this
quiz, you may use Times New Roman font. The only thing necessary to complete this assignment is the
Bluebook (18th or 19th ed.); there is no need to look up any of the sources.

       Hint: Each footnote contains more than one error!


Please type corrected footnotes and submit them with your case comment.


   1. See, Chomsky, Judith, Will the Real ATS Please Stand Up? 33 Suffolk Transnational Law
      Review 451 (Sum. 2010)



   2. BP Oil International, Limited v. Empresa Estatal Petroleos de Ecuador, 332 F. 3d 333, (5th Cir.
      2003) [hereinafter BP Oil].



   3. See: German Advisory Council on Global Change, The Future Oceans–Warming Up,
      Rising High, Turning Sour 65-69 (Christopher Hay trans., 2006),
      http://www.wbgu.de/wbgu_sn2006_en.pdf (blurb) [hereinafter German Advisory Special
      Report]



   4. See also Article 25, Paragraph 1 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, Jul. 1,
      2002, 2187 UNTS 90.



   5. Dispute Settlement Body, supra note #13, at art. 4.
                                                 CASE-IN-CHIEF

                     632 F.3d 60                                Defendant-Appellant Israel Weingarten (“Weingarten”)
            United States Court of Appeals,                     appeals from a May 8, 2009, judgment of the United
                   Second Circuit.                              States District Court for the Eastern District of New York
                                                                (Gleeson, J.), sentencing him to a total of 30 years’
       UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,                      imprisonment and three years’ supervised release
                      v.                                        following his conviction by a jury on two counts of
    Israel WEINGARTEN, Defendant-Appellant.                     transportation of a minor with intent to engage in criminal
                                                                sexual activity, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2423(a), and
   Docket No. 09-2043-cr. Argued: April 19, 2010.               three counts of travel with intent to engage in illicit sexual
              Decided: Jan. 18, 2011.                           conduct, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2423(b). Weingarten
                                                                was sentenced to ten years’ imprisonment on each of the
                                                                five counts, with the sentences pursuant to the first three
Synopsis
                                                                counts-the two counts under § 2423(a) and the first count
Background: Defendant was convicted in the United               under § 2423(b)-to run consecutively, and the sentences
States District Court for the Eastern District of New York,     pursuant to the remaining two counts to run concurrently
John Gleeson, J., 2009 WL 1269722, on two counts of             with each other and with those under the first three
transportation of a minor with intent to engage in criminal     counts.
sexual activity, and three counts of travel with intent to
                                                                Prior to trial, Weingarten moved to dismiss the charges
engage in illicit sexual conduct, and he appealed.
                                                                against him, alleging, inter alia, that Count Three of the
                                                                indictment-the § 2423(b) count for which he ultimately
Holdings: The Court of Appeals, Debra Ann Livingston,           received a ten year, consecutive sentence-was improper
Circuit Judge, held that:                                       because the alleged conduct involved only travel between
1 statute prohibiting travel with intent to engage in illicit   Belgium and Israel. He renews his arguments regarding
sexual conduct is applicable to conduct occurring outside       Count Three on appeal. According to Weingarten, travel
the United States, and                                          that is without a territorial nexus to the United States is
2 statute prohibiting travel in foreign commerce with           not “travel[ ] in foreign commerce” within the meaning of
intent to engage in illicit sexual conduct does not             § 2423(b). Alternatively, if the statute does include such
criminalize travel occurring wholly between two foreign         travel, Weingarten argues that it exceeds Congress’s
countries and without any territorial nexus to the United       authority under the Foreign Commerce Clause.
States.
                                                                Although we hold that § 2423(b) applies to conduct
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.               occurring outside the United States, we conclude that
                                                                travel between two foreign countries, absent any
Attorneys and Law Firms                                         territorial *62 nexus to the United States, does not
                                                                constitute “travel [ ] in foreign commerce” for the purpose
*61 Andrea Goldbarg, Assistant United States Attorney           of § 2423(b). We thus do not reach Weingarten’s
(Jo Ann M. Navickas, Assistant United States Attorney,          constitutional argument. In an accompanying summary
on the brief), for Benton J. Campbell, United States            order filed today, we reject Weingarten’s remaining
Attorney, Eastern District of New York, Brooklyn, NY,           challenges to his conviction. Accordingly, we reverse his
for Appellee.                                                   conviction on Count Three, affirm his conviction on
Stanley Neustadter, New York, NY (Demosthenes                   Counts One, Two, Four, and Five, and remand for
Lorandos and Ashish S. Joshi, Lorandos & Associates,            resentencing on those affirmed counts of conviction.
Ann Arbor, MI, on the brief), for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: CABRANES, WESLEY, and LIVINGSTON,
Circuit Judges.                                                                      BACKGROUND

Opinion                                                         Because “the task of choosing among competing,
                                                                permissible inferences is for the [jury and] not for the
DEBRA ANN LIVINGSTON, Circuit Judge:                            reviewing court,” United States v. McDermott, 245 F.3d
                                                                133, 137 (2d Cir.2001), we are required to review the
                                                                evidence “in the light most favorable to the government,”
United States v. Gaskin, 364 F.3d 438, 459 (2d Cir.2004).     *63 On May 13, 1997, Weingarten, his wife, Doe, and her
Accordingly, we “resolve all issues of credibility in favor   younger siblings returned to Antwerp to finish packing for
of the jury’s verdict.” United States v. Desena, 287 F.3d     the move to Israel. Weingarten continued to sexually
170, 177 (2d Cir.2002) (internal quotation marks              abuse Doe almost every night, often while her mother
omitted); see generally Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307,    slept in the same room. The family subsequently returned
318-19, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979).                 to Israel, where the abuse continued.

Evidence introduced at Weingarten’s trial demonstrated        On July 30, 1997, Weingarten and Doe traveled from
that at the time of the events underlying his conviction on   Israel to Brooklyn, New York, where Weingarten’s father
multiple counts, Weingarten and his family were all           was ill and dying. During the visit, Weingarten sexually
members of the Satmar sect of Hasidic Judaism.                abused Doe at her uncle’s house in Brooklyn. After
Weingarten and his ex-wife have a total of eight children,    Weingarten’s father died, Weingarten and Doe flew from
the oldest being a son born shortly after their marriage in   Brooklyn to Antwerp, arriving on August 19. Alone with
1979, and the next oldest being “Doe,” a daughter born in     Doe at the apartment in Antwerp for about a month,
1981. Weingarten is a United States citizen, but he moved     Weingarten sexually abused her “night and day, every
with his family to Antwerp, Belgium in approximately          day.” Trial Tr. 290:14. Doe informed her father that she
1984.                                                         wanted to return to Israel. Weingarten consented, but as a
                                                              condition of her return, he required Doe to record a
When Doe was nine or ten years old, Weingarten began          conversation with a male neighbor, in which she was to
abusing her sexually. This abuse continued for more than      give the impression that she previously had seduced the
six years and worsened over time. When Doe first              neighbor. Weingarten informed Doe that he planned to
informed her mother that she had been abused,                 play the tape for rabbis in the Satmar community, so that
Weingarten beat Doe with his fists and kicked her             they would believe his claims that she was sexually
between her legs. When Doe was thirteen or fourteen           promiscuous and he had never molested her.
years old, she began to resist Weingarten’s advances and
threatened to tell others about the abuse. After an           Doe returned to Israel in September 1997. She and her
occasion on which Doe’s mother entered her bedroom to         mother contacted the rabbi in Belgium who had
find Weingarten and Doe in bed together, Doe again            previously been involved in sending Doe to England, who
informed her mother of the abuse. Weingarten warned           then assisted Doe in returning to school there. Although
Doe that she would not be believed because of the respect     Weingarten later traveled to England and confronted Doe,
in which he was held in the Satmar community, and             the police intervened, she successfully obtained a
because she would have no evidence of the abuse, as he        protective order against him, and no further abuse
had never had intercourse with her. Doe’s mother              occurred. Doe remained in England for some time, but
promised to confront Weingarten, but when she did so,         eventually moved to New York, where she married a man
Weingarten beat Doe so severely that he would not permit      from the Satmar community. The marriage lasted only
her to return to school for several weeks for fear that her   about a year, after which Doe abandoned her religious
bruises would be seen. When Doe did return to school,         life, left New York, and legally changed her name.
she spoke with her principal about what was occurring.
Eventually, a rabbi of the Belgian Satmar community           Weingarten was not prosecuted until years later, when the
brought Doe before a rabbinical court, where she testified    abuse was brought to the attention of the Federal Bureau
against her father. Afterward, the rabbi arranged to have     of Investigation. A sealed federal indictment was filed
Doe sent to England to live with his daughter and attend      against him on August 18, 2008. Counts One and Four
school there. Doe remained in England for several             charged him in relation to his July 30, 1997, travel from
months.                                                       Israel to Brooklyn, alleging respectively that he
                                                              transported Doe in foreign commerce with the intent that
Weingarten’s criminal charges covered events beginning        she engage in unlawful sexual activity, in violation of 18
in 1997, after Doe returned to Belgium. Upon Doe’s            U.S.C. § 2423(a), and that he traveled in foreign
return from England, Weingarten informed her that the         commerce for the purpose of engaging in illicit sexual
family, resident in Belgium for over thirteen years, would    conduct, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2423(b). Counts Two
be moving to Israel because of the bad name she had           and Five of the indictment charged Weingarten with the
given them by complaining publicly about the abuse. On        same offenses, respectively, in relation to his August 19,
April 14, 1997, the family traveled from Belgium to Bet       2007, travel from Brooklyn to Antwerp. Finally, Count
Shemesh, Israel. While in Bet Shemesh, Doe, then 16,          Three charged Weingarten with a separate violation of 18
was sexually abused by her father. She was not permitted      U.S.C. § 2423(b) in relation to his April 14, 1997, travel
to be in public alone, and was required to sleep separately   between Belgium and Israel at the time he and his family
from the other children.                                      relocated from Antwerp to Bet Shemesh. After a seven
day jury trial, Weingarten was convicted on all five             United States v. Irving, 452 F.3d 110 (2d Cir.2006);
counts against him. This appeal followed.                        United States v. Han, 230 F.3d 560 (2d Cir.2000). Neither
                                                                 the Supreme Court nor this Court, however, has addressed
                                                                 the question of interpretation at issue here-namely,
                                                                 whether a United States citizen, in travel involving no
                      DISCUSSION                                 territorial nexus to the United States, violates § 2423(b)
                                                                 by traveling between two foreign countries with the
With respect to Count Three, Weingarten argues that the          purpose of engaging in a sex act with a minor.
district court erred in failing to dismiss that count of the     Accordingly, we begin our review of this question with
indictment, which related to his April 1997 travel from          the statute’s text. See In re New York Times Co., 577 F.3d
Belgium to Israel, on the grounds that travel involving no       401, 406 (2d Cir.2009) (“In construing the text of any
territorial nexus with the United States is not “travel[ ] in    federal statute, we first consider the precedents that bind
foreign commerce” as required by § 2423(b), and if such          us as an intermediate appellate court, which provide
travel is in fact covered by the statute, it exceeds the         definitive interpretations of otherwise ambiguous
scope of Congress’s authority under the Foreign                  language. Insofar as those precedents fail to resolve an
Commerce Clause. We review de novo a district court’s            apparent ambiguity, we examine the text of the statute
legal conclusions, including its interpretations of federal      itself, interpreting provisions in light of their ordinary
statutes and determinations regarding their *64                  meaning and their contextual setting.”).
constitutionality. See, e.g., United States v. Stewart, 590
F.3d 93, 109 (2d Cir.2009); City of New York v. Beretta          1 2 As the Government acknowledges, in considering the
U.S.A. Corp., 524 F.3d 384, 392 (2d Cir.2008). Because           applicability of § 2423(b) to conduct occurring wholly
our answer to the question of statutory interpretation           beyond the borders of the United States, our review of the
presented here requires reversal of Weingarten’s                 statutory text occurs against the backdrop of two well-
conviction pursuant to Count Three, we address only that         established presumptions. The first is the “presumption
issue, and do not reach his constitutional challenge to §        that Congress does not intend a statute to apply to conduct
2423(b).                                                         outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States”
                                                                 unless it “clearly expresses its intent to do so.” United
                                                                 States v. Yousef, 327 F.3d 56, 86 (2d Cir.2003) (citing
I. Section 2423(b) Is Applicable to Extraterritorial             Foley Bros. v. Filardo, 336 U.S. 281, 285, 69 S.Ct. 575,
Conduct                                                          93 L.Ed. 680 (1949)). The second is the familiar rule of
                                                                 *65 Murray v. The Charming Betsy, 6 U.S. (2 Cranch) 64,
At the time of Weingarten’s offense conduct, 18 U.S.C. §
                                                                 2 L.Ed. 208 (1804), that “an act of [C]ongress ought
2423(b), pursuant to which Weingarten was charged in
                                                                 never to be construed to violate the law of nations, if any
Count Three of his indictment, provided as follows:
                                                                 other possible construction remains.” Weinberger v.
                                                                 Rossi, 456 U.S. 25, 32, 102 S.Ct. 1510, 71 L.Ed.2d 715
  A person who travels in interstate commerce, or                (1982) (quoting Charming Betsy, 6 U.S. (2 Cranch) at
  conspires to do so, or a United States citizen or an alien     118); see also Cheung v. United States, 213 F.3d 82, 92
  admitted for permanent residence in the United States
                                                                 (2d Cir.2000). We agree with the Government that neither
  who travels in foreign commerce, or conspires to do so,
                                                                 of these presumptions requires us to conclude that §
  for the purpose of engaging in any sexual act (as
                                                                 2423(b) is categorically inapplicable to conduct occurring
  defined in section 2246) with a person under 18 years
                                                                 overseas.
  of age that would be in violation of chapter 109A if the
  sexual act occurred in the special maritime and                The Supreme Court recently reiterated that the
  territorial jurisdiction of the United States shall be fined   presumption      against      extraterritorial application
  under this title, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or        “represents a canon of construction, or a presumption
  both.                                                          about a statute’s meaning, rather than a limit upon
                                                                 Congress’s power to legislate.” Morrison v. Nat’l Austl.
18 U.S.C. § 2423(b) (emphasis added).1 Since § 2423(b)           Bank Ltd., --- U.S. ----, 130 S.Ct. 2869, 2877, 177
does not contain a particularized definition of “foreign
                                                                 L.Ed.2d 535 (2010). The canon is not a “clear statement”
commerce,” it relies on the general definition of that term      requirement, “if by that is meant a requirement that a
found in 18 U.S.C. § 10, which states only that, for the         statute say ‘this law applies abroad,’ ” and so
purposes of Title 18, “[t]he term ‘foreign commerce’ ...
                                                                 “[a]ssuredly, context can be consulted as well” in
includes commerce with a foreign country.”
                                                                 searching for a clear indication of statutory meaning. Id.
                                                                 at 2883; see also Kollias v. D & G Marine Maint., 29 F.3d
This Court has considered § 2423(b) in cases involving
travel in both interstate and foreign commerce. See, e.g.,       67, 73 (2d Cir.1994) (noting that E.E.O.C. v. Aramco, 499
                                                                 U.S. 244, 248, 111 S.Ct. 1227, 113 L.Ed.2d 274 (1991),
United States v. Hawkins, 513 F.3d 59 (2d Cir.2008);
and subsequent Supreme Court precedents indicate that          111 S.Ct. 1227, the words “travel[ ] in foreign commerce”
“reference to nontextual sources is permissible” and that      here go to the heart of the statute’s operative text,
“all available evidence” should be considered in               describing the specific conduct proscribed by the statute,
determining whether a statute applies abroad (quoting          see Pasquantino v. United States, 544 U.S. 349, 371-72,
Sale v. Haitian Ctrs. Council, Inc., 509 U.S. 155, 177,        125 S.Ct. 1766, 161 L.Ed.2d 619 (2005) (observing in
113 S.Ct. 2549, 125 L.Ed.2d 128 (1993))). The Supreme          dicta that even if defendants’ conduct in violation of the
Court has repeatedly held, however, “that even statutes        wire fraud statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1343, could be deemed to
that contain broad language in their definitions of            have occurred outside the United States, the statute’s
‘commerce’ that expressly refer to ‘foreign commerce’ do       prohibition of frauds executed “in interstate or foreign
not apply abroad.” Morrison, 130 S.Ct. at 2882 (quoting        commerce” indicates that “this is surely not a statute in
Aramco, 499 U.S. at 251, 111 S.Ct. 1227); see also             which Congress had only domestic concerns in mind”
Aramco, 499 U.S. at 251-52, 111 S.Ct. 1227 (discussing         (internal quotation marks omitted)). Furthermore, §
cases). In Aramco, the Court noted that “[m]any Acts of        2423(b) explicitly distinguishes between the class of
Congress are based on the authority of that body to            people who may violate the statute by conspiring to or
regulate commerce among the several States,” and if it         actually traveling in interstate commerce with the
were to permit “possible, or even plausible,”                  proscribed intent (namely, “person[s]”) and the narrower
interpretations of boilerplate “commerce” language to          class who may also do so with regard to travel in foreign
override the presumption against extraterritorial              commerce (namely, “United States citizen[s] or ... alien[s]
application, “there would be little left of the                admitted for permanent residence”). This distinction
presumption.” Aramco, 499 U.S. at 253, 111 S.Ct. 1227.         evinces Congress’s intent to extend the reach of this law
We thus look for a “clear” and “affirmative indication”        beyond American borders in a manner consistent with
that a statute applies to conduct occurring outside the        international law, see United States v. Pizzarusso, 388
territorial jurisdiction of the United States, Morrison, 130   F.2d 8, 10 (2d Cir.1968),2 and would be rendered
S.Ct. at 2883, before concluding that the presumption has      nonsensical if the law applied only to conduct occurring
been overcome.                                                 within United States territory. At least one of our sister
                                                               circuits, moreover, has relied on an identical reference to
3 Such a clear and affirmative indication is present here.     “travel[ ] in foreign commerce” in a later-enacted
Section 2423(b) manifestly expresses Congress’s concern        subsection of § 2423 to find the text of that statute
with conduct that occurs overseas, criminalizing travel in     “explicit as to its application outside the United States.”
foreign commerce undertaken with the intent to commit          See United States v. Clark, 435 F.3d 1100, 1106 (9th
sexual acts with minors that “would be in violation of         Cir.2006).
chapter 109A if the sexual act occurred in the special
maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States.”   In addition, although we find the available evidence here
18 U.S.C. § 2423(b) (emphasis added). The statute’s use        sufficient to overcome the presumption against
of the subjunctive makes clear that the law is aimed at        extraterritoriality, there is reason to doubt that the
travel preceding such acts, regardless of whether their        presumption against extraterritoriality applies to §
planned accomplishment is within, or without, the borders      2423(b) at all. In United States v. Bowman, 260 U.S. 94,
of the United States. Thus, while the conduct actually         43 S.Ct. 39, 67 L.Ed. 149 (1922), the Supreme Court
proscribed by the statute involves the combination of          indicated that “Congress is presumed to intend
travel and the requisite intent, rather than the planned       extraterritorial application of criminal statutes where the
sexual acts themselves, see Han, 230 F.3d at 563, it can       nature of the crime does not depend on the locality of the
hardly be said that § 2423(b) evinces only Congress’s          defendants’ acts and where restricting the statute to
“primar[y] concern[ ] with domestic conditions,” Foley         United States territory would severely diminish the
Bros., 336 U.S. at 285, 69 S.Ct. 575; cf. United States v.     statute’s effectiveness.” Yousef, 327 F.3d at 87 (emphasis
Delgado-Garcia, 374 F.3d 1337, 1343-45 (D.C.Cir.2004)          added) (citing Bowman, 260 U.S. at 98, 43 S.Ct. 39).
(noting that a statute criminalizing conspiracies to induce    While “Bowman does not hold that criminal statutes
aliens to illegally enter the United States and attempts to    always apply extraterritorially” and instead requires
bring illegal aliens into the United States, *66 8 U.S.C. §    “judges ... [to] consider the language and function of the
1324(a), “concerns much more than merely ‘domestic             prohibition,” United States v. Leija-Sanchez, 602 F.3d
conditions’ ”).                                                797, 799 (7th Cir.2010), given that Weingarten’s statute
                                                               of conviction expressly proscribes both the substantive
Moreover, § 2423(b)’s reference to “foreign commerce”          offense of traveling in foreign commerce to engage in
is not a “boilerplate” reference of the type the Supreme       illicit sexual relations with minors and conspiracy to do
Court has found insufficient to support extraterritorial       so, it is reasonable to conclude that Congress intended to
application of federal statutes. Rather than forming part of   proscribe such crimes when hatched abroad, lest the
a generic definition, see, e.g., Aramco, 499 U.S. at 251,      effectiveness of the statute be threatened, see Yousef, 327
F.3d at 87-88; see also *67 Delgado-Garcia, 374 F.3d at           The text, unfortunately, is ambiguous in this regard. As
1345-46 (noting that under Bowman, the relevant inquiry           noted above, 18 U.S.C. § 10 indicates only that “ ‘foreign
is whether the offenses covered by the statute are likely to      commerce’ ... includes commerce with a foreign country.”
be committed abroad, and concluding that 8 U.S.C. §               Cf. Clark, 435 F.3d at 1114 (“[T]his definition [in § 10] is
1324(a), prohibiting inducement of and attempts at illegal        not particularly helpful given its rearrangement of the
immigration, therefore reaches conduct abroad); United            words being defined in the definition itself.”). The word
States v. Plummer, 221 F.3d 1298, 1304-06 (11th                   “commerce” in this context is defined generally as “[t]he
Cir.2000) (relying on Bowman in concluding that the               exchange of goods and services, esp[ecially] on a large
attempt provision of 18 U.S.C. § 545, prohibiting                 scale involving transportation between cities, states, and
smuggling, applies to conduct outside the United States,          nations.” Black’s Law Dictionary 285 (8th ed.2004). One
and citing similar cases). For this reason and those              inference that certainly might be drawn is that “foreign
discussed above, we conclude that the presumption                 commerce” refers to “the exchange of goods and
against extraterritoriality is no barrier to the application of   services” between the United States and a foreign
§ 2423(b) to conduct occurring outside the United States.         country-a reading of “foreign commerce,” as used in §
                                                                  2423(b), that is certainly consonant with the statute’s
Finally, turning to the rule of Charming Betsy, we need           enactment pursuant *68 to Congress’s power “[t]o
spend little time explaining why construing § 2423(b) to          regulate Commerce with foreign Nations.” U.S. Const.
apply to overseas conduct by American citizens and                art. I, § 8, cl. 3 (emphasis added); compare id. (granting
permanent residents does not violate the presumption that         Congress the power to regulate commerce “among the
Congress typically does not intend its laws to conflict           several States” (emphasis added)). The definition of
with the law of nations. Simply put, such application of §        foreign commerce in § 10, however, only “includes
2423(b) violates no rule of customary international law.          commerce with a foreign country,” leaving open the
The nationality principle, which permits a nation to              possibility that foreign commerce might include
extend its legislative jurisdiction-or “jurisdiction to           something more, such as, for instance, commerce among
prescribe”-to cover the conduct of its nationals abroad, is       foreign nations. There is little indication, however, of
among the most firmly established bases for jurisdiction          what this something more might be. See United States v.
recognized by international law. See Pizzarusso, 388 F.2d         Montford, 27 F.3d 137, 139 (5th Cir.1994) (noting that
at 10; see also Yousef, 327 F.3d at 91 n. 24 (listing             the definition in § 10 “does not state that foreign
nationality principle as second of five bases of criminal         commerce is limited exclusively to commerce with a
jurisdiction recognized by customary international law);          foreign country,” but ultimately rejecting the argument
Restatement (Third) of Foreign Relations Law § 402(2).            that “foreign commerce” includes a “cruise to nowhere,”
Moreover, although the Restatement indicates that a               during which the cruise ship departed from and returned
nation’s exercise of jurisdiction must be “reasonable,” see       to the same United States port without stopping in a
Restatement (Third) at § 403 (listing factors to be               foreign country).
considered), Weingarten does not argue that construing §
2423(b) to reach American citizens and lawful permanent           The current § 10, as the Fifth Circuit observed in
resident aliens acting abroad would be unreasonable               Montford, “consolidated and recodified prior provisions
under customary international law.                                of Title 18” that had defined interstate and foreign
                                                                  commerce. Id.; see also Revisor’s Note, 18 U.S.C. § 10
                                                                  (“This section consolidates into one section identical
II. “Travel[ ] in Foreign Commerce” Under § 2423(b)               definitions contained in §§ 408, 408b, 414(a), and
Does Not Include Travel Between Foreign Nations                   419a(b)....”). In those prior provisions, consolidated in
Absent a Territorial Nexus to the United States                   1948 into what is currently § 10, “interstate or foreign
                                                                  commerce” was specifically defined to include “
4 Our conclusion that neither the presumption against             ‘transportation from one State, Territory or the District of
extraterritoriality nor the rule of Charming Betsy limits §       Columbia to another State, Territory, or the District of
2423(b) to conduct occurring within the United States is          Columbia, or to a foreign country; or from a foreign
not dispositive as to the question before us. Although we         country to any State, Territory, or the District of
hold that § 2423(b) is applicable to conduct occurring            Columbia.’ ” Montford, 27 F.3d at 139 (quoting United
outside the United States, it remains to be determined            States v. Goldberg, 830 F.2d 459, 468 (3d Cir.1987)
whether the specific conduct for which Weingarten was             (Sloviter, J., dissenting in part)). This earlier definition of
convicted under Count Three-travel for the purpose of             “foreign commerce” more clearly suggested that such
engaging in a sexual act with his minor daughter where            commerce involved the exchange of goods and services
such travel was between two foreign nations, and without          between the United States and a foreign country.
any territorial nexus to the United States-falls within the
statute’s reference to “travel[ ] in foreign commerce.”           It does not appear that the revised definition in § 10 was
meant to effectuate a substantive change. See id. (citing      in revising and consolidating the laws, intended to change
Goldberg, 830 F.2d at 468 (Sloviter, J., dissenting in part)   their effect unless such intention is clearly expressed.”
(“The Revisor’s Notes refer to ‘slight improvements in         Finley v. United States, 490 U.S. 545, 554, 109 S.Ct.
style’ in the recodified version. However, there is no         2003, 104 L.Ed.2d 593 (1989) (internal quotation marks
indication that Congress intended to broaden the               omitted); see also Fourco Glass Co. v. Transmirra Prods.
definitions of ‘foreign commerce’....”)). As the Revisor’s     Corp., 353 U.S. 222, 227, 77 S.Ct. 787, 1 L.Ed.2d 786
Note indicates, the primary purpose of the revision,           (1957) (“[N]o changes of law or policy are to be
beyond mere “slight improvements in style,” was to avoid       presumed from changes in the [1948] revision unless an
the narrow connotation of the word “transportation.”           intent to make such changes is clearly expressed.”). We
Revisor’s Note, 18 U.S.C. § 10; Black’s Law Dictionary         do not perceive any such clear expression here, and the
1537 (8th ed.2004) (defining “transportation” as “[t]he        1948 enactment of § 10, standing alone, surely “would be
movement of goods or persons from one place to another         a strange way to express the substantive revision”
by a carrier”); see also United States v. De La Rosa, 911      required, see Finley, 490 U.S. at 554, 109 S.Ct. 2003, to
F.2d 985, 990 (5th Cir.1990) (“[T]he purpose of the            read its definition of “foreign commerce” as
change was to substitute the broad word ‘commerce’ for         encompassing all forms of commerce occurring outside
the narrower word ‘transportation.’ ‘Foreign commerce’         the United States and without any nexus whatsoever to
means to or from the United States.”). What the 1948           this country.
revision did not evince, however, was a congressional
desire to change the parties between which commerce            Consideration of § 10’s definition as incorporated in other
must occur. See United States v. McRary, 665 F.2d 674,         criminal prohibitions in Title 18, moreover, strongly
678 n. 6 (5th Cir.1982) (“The mere consolidation by the        indicates that one does not “travel[ ] in foreign
1948 Revisors, of course, is not evidence of a change in       commerce” simply by traveling between two foreign
legislative intent.”); cf. Clark, 435 F.3d at 1114 (noting     countries, absent some territorial nexus to the United
the Fifth Circuit’s observation “that foreign commerce         States. Section 1201 of Title 18, for example, provides in
under § 10 ‘means passing to and fro’ ” (quoting Londos        relevant part:
v. United States, 240 F.2d 1, 6 (5th Cir.1957))). Both the
Supreme Court and this Court, moreover, have indicated           (a) Whoever unlawfully seizes, confines, inveigles,
that, at least as a general matter, “[t]he 1948 Revision was     decoys, kidnaps, abducts, or carries away and holds for
not intended to create new crimes but to recodify those          ransom or reward or otherwise any person, except in
then in existence.” United States v. Reid, 517 F.2d 953,         the case of a minor by the parent thereof, when
957 (2d Cir.1975) (Friendly, J.) (quoting *69 Morissette
v. United States, 342 U.S. 246, 266-69 n. 28, 72 S.Ct.              (1) the person is willfully transported in interstate or
240, 96 L.Ed. 288 (1952)).                                          foreign commerce; ... [or]

This recodification history is certainly not conclusive and         (2) any such act against the person is done within the
would be entitled to scant, if any, consideration if the            special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the
definition of “foreign commerce” in § 2423(b) were                  United States; ...
unambiguous. See United States v. Wells, 519 U.S. 482,
                                                                  shall be punished by imprisonment for any term of
497, 117 S.Ct. 921, 137 L.Ed.2d 107 (1997) (holding that
                                                                  years or for life....
the absence of a materiality requirement in the recodified
                                                               18 U.S.C. § 1201. In McRary, the Fifth Circuit rejected
crime of knowingly making a false statement to a
                                                               the government’s argument that the defendants in that
federally insured bank, see 18 U.S.C. § 1014, required the
                                                               case had been properly charged under subsection (a)(1)
Court to interpret that statute as having no such element,
                                                               for a kidnaping perpetrated on the high seas, in which the
notwithstanding the presence of that element in some of
                                                               victims were subsequently taken to Cuba. 665 F.2d at
the prior false representation crimes that had been
                                                               675. It held that “the foreign commerce jurisdictional
consolidated under § 1014 and a Revisor’s Note
                                                               basis mandates that [a] kidnapping take place in the
explaining that the change in text was “without change of
                                                               United States and that the victim be subsequently
substance”); see also Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allapattah
                                                               transported to a foreign State.” Id. at 678. The court
Servs., 545 U.S. 546, 568, 125 S.Ct. 2611, 162 L.Ed.2d
                                                               correctly observed that to read “transport[ ] in ... foreign
502 (2005) (noting that “[e]xtrinsic materials have a role
                                                               commerce” to include *70 any transportation to or from a
in statutory interpretation only to the extent they shed a
                                                               foreign nation, absent a territorial nexus to the United
reliable light on the enacting Legislature’s understanding
                                                               States, would render the alternate jurisdictional provision
of otherwise ambiguous terms”). Specifically addressing
                                                               of subsection (a)(2), which limits the statute’s coverage of
the 1948 recodification, however, the Supreme Court has
                                                               kidnapings on the high seas to include only those aboard
stated, relying on “established canons of statutory
                                                               vessels owned in whole or in part by United States
construction,” that “it will not be inferred that Congress,
                                                               citizens, largely superfluous. Id.
The existence of statutory provisions that would be                     question may be avoided”).
rendered superfluous by our adoption of an overly
expansive interpretation of § 10 provides a compelling                  Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons, we conclude that
reason to reject such an interpretation. See United States              18 U.S.C. § 2423(b) does not criminalize travel occurring
v. Kozeny, 541 F.3d 166, 171 (2d Cir.2008). So, too, do                 wholly between two foreign countries and without any
inferences properly drawn from the presumption against                  territorial nexus to the United States. We do not suggest,
extraterritoriality, discussed supra. The presumption                   of course, that the mere presence of an intermediate stop
requires careful analysis, on a statute-by-statute basis, of            outside the United States on a multi-legged journey
Congress’s intent to regulate conduct occurring outside                 undertaken for unlawful purposes will immunize a
the United States. Given this presumption, we conclude                  defendant from prosecution under § 2423(b). An offender
that it would be anomalous to construe the general                      violates the law when he embarks on travel with the
definition of “foreign commerce” in § 10, upon which                    requisite illicit purpose, see, e.g., Clark, 435 F.3d at 1119;
many of Title 18’s provisions rely in setting out the scope             United States v. Bredimus, 234 F.Supp.2d 639, 645-46
of criminal prohibitions, as including all forms of                     (N.D.Tex.2002), and mere stops along the way do not
commerce occurring outside the United States and                        deprive travel of its territorial nexus to the United States.
without nexus whatsoever to this country.                               We note, in addition, that the issue of statutory
                                                                        construction that this case presents would be substantially
We note, in addition, that the Government has not                       different if § 2423(b) prohibited travel for the purpose of
directed our attention to any precedent suggesting that the             engaging in the defined sexual acts where such travel
words “travel[ ] in foreign commerce,” as used in §                     affects foreign commerce. Section 2423(b), however,
2423(b), encompass travel between two foreign nations                   prohibits travel in foreign commerce, and Count Three,
absent a territorial nexus to the United States. A review of            which involved simply a flight from Belgium, where the
relevant pattern jury instructions contained in prominent               defendant resided, to Israel, his new home, did not
treatises or promulgated by our sister circuits, though                 constitute such travel.
non-precedential, further demonstrates that when defining
“foreign commerce” for the purpose of statutory
provisions subject to § 10’s general definition, the
common interpretation generally limits such commerce to                                       CONCLUSION
that involving some nexus to the United States. See, e.g.,
Kevin F. O’Malley et al., Federal Jury Practice and                     Because our analysis of the statute of conviction disposes
Instructions § 43.04 (2000) (instructing, “based upon 18                of this appeal, we need not and do not reach Weingarten’s
[U.S.C.] § 10,” in context of 18 U.S.C. § 1073, that “[t]he             argument regarding the scope of Congress’s authority to
phrase ‘moves or travels in interstate or foreign                       regulate the conduct of United States citizens traveling
commerce’ means movement or travel between one state                    abroad, whether under the Foreign Commerce Clause or
and another or between one state and a foreign country ”                any other grant of power. For the foregoing reasons, and
(emphasis added)); Leonard B. Sand et al., Modern                       for the reasons stated in the accompanying summary order
Federal Jury Instructions 50A-8 (2005) (“The term                       filed today, Weingarten’s conviction as to Count Three is
‘interstate or foreign commerce’ means commerce                         REVERSED, his convictions pursuant to the remaining
between any combination of states, territories or                       counts in this case are AFFIRMED, and the case is
possessions of the United States, or between the United                 REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this
States and a foreign country.” (emphasis added)).3 We                   opinion.
note, finally, that our determination that § 2423(b) does
not extend to travel occurring wholly between foreign
nations and without any territorial nexus *71 to the
United States appropriately avoids the necessity of
addressing whether such an exercise of congressional
power would comport with the Constitution. Cf. Rescue
Army v. Mun. Court, 331 U.S. 549, 569, 67 S.Ct. 1409, 91
L.Ed. 1666 (1947) (noting canon that “constitutional
issues affecting legislation will not be determined ... if a
construction of the statute is fairly possible by which the

 Footnotes
1       18 U.S.C. § 2423 was subsequently amended in ways not relevant to this appeal. Unless otherwise noted, all statutory references
        in the text are to the statute as it existed at the time of the acts underlying Weingarten’s conviction.
2   In Pizzarusso, we observed that of the five bases of criminal jurisdiction recognized by customary international law, “both the
    territoriality and nationality principles, under which jurisdiction is determined by either the situs of the crime or the nationality of
    the accused, are universally accepted.” 388 F.2d at 10 (noting further that “the United States has relied primarily upon the
    territoriality and nationality principles”).

3   See also Fifth Circuit District Judges Association Pattern Jury Instructions Committee, Pattern Jury Instructions, Criminal Cases
    § 1.40 (2001) (noting, as general definition, that “[f]oreign commerce means commerce or travel between any part of the United
    States, including its territorial waters, and any other country, including its territorial waters”); Committee on Federal Criminal
    Jury Instructions for the Seventh Circuit, Pattern Federal Jury Instructions for the Seventh Circuit 304 (1998) (instructing, in
    context of 18 U.S.C. § 2312, that “[t]he term foreign commerce means movement in or out of the United States”); Criminal
    Pattern Jury Instruction Committee of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, Criminal Pattern Jury
    Instructions § 1.39 (2005) (noting, as general definition, that “[f]oreign commerce means commerce between any part of the
    United States (including its territorial waters), and any other country (including its territorial waters)”); Committee on Pattern Jury
    Instructions of the Judicial Council of the Eleventh Circuit, Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions (Criminal Cases) § 93.2
    (2010) (instructing, in specific context of 18 U.S.C. § 2423(b), that “ ‘[i]nterstate or foreign commerce’ is the movement or
    transportation of a person from one state to another state or from a place within the United States to a place outside the United
    States”).
                         SUFFOLK TRANSNATIONAL LAW REVIEW

                      OPEN WRITE-ON COMPETITION CHECKLIST

UNLESS SPECIAL ARRANGEMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE WITH THE EDITOR-IN-
CHIEF, THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ARE DUE IN THE TRANSNATIONAL OFFICE (Suite
440) AND TO BE CONTEMPORANEOUSLY EMAILED BY 5:00 P.M. ON FRIDAY, JUNE
3, 2011.

HARDCOPIES
Please include in a single packet in the order detailed in the below list.

1.      A single cover page with the following Information:

                NAME

                ID NUMBER

                2011-12 LAW SCHOOL CLASS

                PHONE NO. (where you can be reached on Sunday, June 19, 2011)

                EMAIL ADDRESS (where you can be reached on Sunday, June 19, 2011)

                SUMMER ADDRESS

2.      One copy of your completed Bluebook quiz.

3.      One copy of your optional 250 word personal statement (if relevant – see above).

4.      Ten copies of your competition piece with your Student I.D. number placed on the top
        right-hand corner of the first page of each copy.


ELECTRONIC COPY
The title of the document should be your Student ID number followed by a hyphen and
TLROpenComp (i.e. 1234567-TLROpenComp). The subject of the email should be “Completed
Application for Open Write-On Competition.”

1.      Email one copy of your cover page, completed Bluebook quiz, optional 250 word personal
        statement, and competition piece with your Student I.D. number placed on the top right-
        hand corner of the first page of each copy (as separate files) to
        SuffolkTransnationalLawReview@gmail.com.

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:14
posted:5/26/2012
language:
pages:71