Fact Check: "The United States has a strong interest in enforcing its judgments."
What We Know
The claim that the United States has a strong interest in enforcing its judgments is supported by several legal analyses and scholarly articles. According to a publication by S.I. Strong, the U.S. is currently experiencing a heightened interest in transnational litigation, which includes the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments (source-2). This interest is reflected in the activities of the U.S. Supreme Court and the American Law Institute (ALI), which is revising and drafting Restatements concerning international law.
Furthermore, U.S. courts have historically been liberal in recognizing and enforcing foreign judgments, although this process often involves significant scrutiny (source-4). The enforcement of judgments is primarily governed by state law, which can vary significantly across jurisdictions (source-8).
Analysis
The assertion that the U.S. has a strong interest in enforcing its judgments can be seen as partially true. On one hand, there is a clear institutional interest in ensuring that U.S. judgments are respected internationally, which is beneficial for American businesses and individuals engaged in cross-border transactions. The support from the international business community for legislative reforms aimed at creating a more predictable framework for recognizing and enforcing foreign judgments further underscores this interest (source-2).
On the other hand, the enforcement of foreign judgments is not without its challenges. The scrutiny that foreign judgments face in U.S. courts indicates that while there is interest, it is tempered by concerns about fairness, public policy, and the legal standards of the U.S. legal system (source-3). This scrutiny can lead to inconsistencies in how judgments are enforced, depending on the jurisdiction and specific circumstances of each case.
Moreover, the U.S. has not yet ratified The Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements, which would further facilitate the enforcement of foreign judgments (source-2). This lack of ratification suggests that while there is interest, there are also significant barriers to achieving a uniform approach to enforcement.
Conclusion
The verdict on the claim that "The United States has a strong interest in enforcing its judgments" is Partially True. While there is institutional interest and a framework in place for recognizing and enforcing judgments, various challenges and inconsistencies indicate that this interest is not as robust or straightforward as it may appear. The complexities of state law, the scrutiny of foreign judgments, and the lack of ratification of international agreements all contribute to a nuanced understanding of the U.S. stance on this issue.
Sources
- The Public Policy Exception to the Recognition of Foreign Judgments (https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2091&context=vjtl)
- Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in U.S. Courts: Problems and Possibilities (https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/facpubs/530/)
- Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in U.S. Courts (https://scholarship.law.uc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1416&context=fac_pubs)
- Enforcement of Foreign Money-Judgments in the United States (https://scholarship.law.pitt.edu/fac_articles/317/)
- Enforcement of Judgments: Overview (United States) (https://www.hoganlovells.com/-/media/hogan-lovells/global/knowledge/publications/files/2024/enforcement-of-judgments-overview-united-states-1.pdf)
- United States ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENTS IN CIVIL AND COMMERCIAL MATTERS (https://www.gibsondunn.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Jura-Loza-United-States-Enforcement-of-Judgments-in-Civil-and-Commercial-Matters-The-Legal-500-August-2022.pdf)