US accession to UNCLOS would uniquely expose it to baseless climate change lawsuits
Currently, there is no forum in which to initiate a viable international climate change lawsuit against the United States. The U.S. withdrew from the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 1985 and is not as yet a party to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).2
However, if the United States accedes to UNCLOS, thereby reversing a 30-year policy of remaining outside of the convention, the U.S. would be exposed to climate change lawsuits and other environmental actions brought against it by other members of the convention. The eco- nomic and political ramifications of such lawsuits would be dire.
This paper demonstrates that accession to UNCLOS would unnecessarily expose the United States to baseless and opportunistic international lawsuits, including suits based on the theory of anthropogenic climate change.
Related argument(s) where this quote is used.
By ratifying UNCLOS, the U.S. would be exposed to climate change lawsuits and other environmental actions brought against it by other members of the convention and the economic and political ramifications of such lawsuits could be dire.Related Quotes:
Parent Arguments:Supporting Arguments:
- US accession to UNCLOS would uniquely expose it to baseless climate change lawsuits
- Climate change activists looking forward to having venue of ITLOS tribunal to bring climate change suits against US
- UNCLOS unique from other environmental agreements in the scale of the external judicial review it imposes
- Environmentalists anxious to use UNCLOS to sue U.S. government over environmental damage
- ... and 10 more quote(s)