This Earl F. Nelson Lecture, given at the University of Missouri School of Law's Symposium, Return to Missouri v. Holland: Federalism and International Law, developed from and overlaps with a series of articles including Ratifying Kyoto at the Local Level: Sovereigntism, Federalism, and Translocal Organizations of Government Actors (TOGAs), 50 ARIZ. L. REV. 709 (2008) (with Joshua Civin and Joseph Frueh); Lessons in Federalism from the 1960s Class Action Rule and the 2005 Class Action Fairness Act: "The Political Safeguards'" ofAggregate Translocal Actions, 156 U. PA. L. REv. 1929 (2008); Law as Affiliation: "Foreign " Law, Democratic Federalism, and the Sovereigntism of the Nation-State, 6 INT'L J. CONST. L. 33 (2008); Foreign as Domestic Affairs: Rethinking Horizontal Federalism and Foreign Affairs Preemption in Light of Translocal Internationalism, 57 EMORY. L.J. 31 (2007); Law's Migration: American Exceptionalism, Silent Dialogues, and Federalism's Multiple Ports of Entry, 115 YALE L.J. 1564 (2006); and Categorical Federalism: Jurisdiction, Gender, and the Globe, 111 YALE L.J. 619 (2001). Thanks are due to Peggy McGuinness for bringing the group together, to the participants in this symposium's sessions and in the Arizona Law Review symposium, Federalism and Climate Change: The Role of the States in a Future Federal Regime, to Joseph Frueh for his analysis of the precautionary principle and California's legislative efforts involving "toxic toys," to Joshua Civin whose research brought into focus for me the transnational work of the eighteenth century, to Camilla Tubbs of Yale's Law Library for extraordinarily thoughtful research advice, to Adam Grogg, Chavi Nana, Vasudha Talla, and Monica Bell for helpful research and editorial assistance, and to my colleagues Dennis Curtis, Oona Hathaway, Vicki Jackson, and Reva Siegel.
Internationalism of American Federalism: Missouri and Holland, The,
73 Mo. L. Rev.
Available at: https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/mlr/vol73/iss4/10