Document Type

Article

Publication Title

Saint Louis University Law Journal

Abstract

David Sloss’s paper recovers an important episode in early American history—the neutrality controversy—and suggests some of its implications for the constitutional law of federal court jurisdiction. It is a fascinating analysis from which lawyers and historians can learn much. My only major comment is that Sloss could consider viewing the controversy as, foremost, a diplomatic crisis for a newly postcolonial nation rather than a domestic problem of constitutional interpretation. He could then consider how the United States’ precarious international situation influenced the way that the founding generation constructed their new Constitution. The special features of their domestic constitutionalism, in turn, allowed the founders-turned-administrators to innovate upon the doctrine of neutrality under the law of nations. The neutrality controversy, therefore, left its marks on both international and domestic law.

First Page

209

Volume

53

Publication Date

2008

Download

Share

COinS