scholarly journals The President’s Private Dictionary: How Secret Definitions Undermine Domestic and Transnational Efforts at Executive Branch Accountability

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sudha N. Setty
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
National Security ◽  
The United States ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Privacy Rights ◽  
Customer Data ◽  
Legal Constraints ◽  
The U.S

Published: Sudha Setty, The President's Private Dictionary: How Secret Definitions Undermine Domestic and Transnational Efforts at Executive Branch Accountability, 24 IND. J. GLOBAL LEGAL STUD. 513 (2017)..The 2016 EU-U.S. Privacy Shield is an agreement allowing companies to move customer data between the European Union and the United States without running afoul of heightened privacy protections in the European Union. It was developed in response to EU concerns that the privacy rights of its citizens have been systematically abrogated by the U.S. government in the name of national security, and contains a variety of assurances that the United States will respect and protect the privacy rights of EU citizens.How trustworthy are the U.S. assurances under the Privacy Shield? Both the Bush and Obama administrations secretly interpreted the terms of treaties, statutes and regulations in a manner that allowed them to take controversial actions, keep those actions secret, and later invoke national security to defend the legality of those actions if they became public. In cases involving torture, bulk data collection, and targeted killing, these administrations did so despite the common and objective understanding of applicable legal constraints not providing authorization for the very actions that they claimed were legal.It remains an open question as to whether the Trump administration will interpret the Privacy Shield in a similarly misleading manner: one in which public assurances suggest compliance with the Privacy Shield’s constraints, but the administration’s private interpretation of the Privacy Shield secretly breaches EU privacy protections. This paper considers possible ways to constrain the executive branch from relying on secret interpretations that would undermine the Privacy Shield’s transnational attempts at accountability

Tiptoeing the Line Between National Security and Protectionism: A Comparative Approach to Foreign Direct Investment Screening in the United States and European Union

2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (02) ◽  
pp. 105-117
Author(s):  
Jason Jacobs
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
Foreign Direct Investment ◽  
National Security ◽  
Direct Investment ◽  
The United States ◽  
Comparative Approach ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Policy Goals ◽  
The U.S

AbstractWeaponization of state-backed, foreign investments by China is an emerging national security threat in the United States and the European Union. The U.S. and E.U. have espoused similar policy goals—to address the threat without closing their markets to foreign direct investment—while fostering increased cooperation between allied partners in screening transactions.On the surface, the recent, China-specific measures taken by the U.S. and the investment screening framework adopted by the E.U. appear reflective of an alignment of those policy goals. Indeed, many commentators have suggested that is exactly what is happening. However, closer examination reveals a stark divergence. The U.S. has a robust screening mechanism that has evolved into a weapon of economic warfare. The E.U. meanwhile, remains a patchwork of conflicting—or nonexistent—national regulations overlaid by a comparatively toothless investment screening framework.There is a tendency to attribute this divergence to structural differences between the United States and European Union. This in-depth comparison of U.S. and E.U. investment screening mechanisms exposes a split that goes beyond application and into actual policy. This revelation should temper expectations that the E.U. is equipping itself to block transactions that are of concern to the U.S.

Russian Federation and the United States of America: geostrategic directions to manage the Ukrainian crisis

2019 ◽  
pp. 123
Author(s):  
Attarid Awadh Abdulhameed
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
National Security ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Ukrainian Crisis ◽  
Zero Sum

Ukrainia Remains of huge importance to Russian Strategy because of its Strategic importance. For being a privileged Postion in new Eurasia, without its existence there would be no logical resons for eastward Expansion by European Powers.  As well as in Connection with the progress of Ukrainian is no less important for the USA (VSD, NDI, CIA, or pentagon) and the European Union with all organs, and this is announced by John Kerry. There has always ben Russian Fear and Fear of any move by NATO or USA in the area that it poses a threat to  Russians national Security and its independent role and in funence  on its forces especially the Navy Forces. There for, the Crisis manyement was not Zero sum game, there are gains and offset losses, but Russia does not accept this and want a Zero Sun game because the USA. And European exteance is a Foot hold in Regin Which Russian sees as a threat to its national security and want to monopolize control in the strategic Qirim.

scholarly journals A Weaponized Court of Justice in Schrems II

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
Jeffery Atik ◽  
Xavier Groussot
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
National Security ◽  
The United States ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The European Union ◽  
General Data Protection Regulation ◽  
Legal Development ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
General Data ◽  
The U.S

The U.S.-EU conflict over the application of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) to U.S.-based digital platform companies is marked by a startling legal development: the insertion of a constitutional court squarely into the heart of the dispute. The engagement of the EU’s top court - the Court of Justice (CJEU) - in the Schrems I and Schrems II cases - has significantly inflamed the dispute. The CJEU has now twice struck down GDPR accommodations reached between the United States and the European Union. In doing so, the Court has rebuked both U.S. and EU officials. By transfiguring provisions of the GDPR with constitutional (that is, treaty-based) and human rights values, the Court has placed out of reach any accommodation that does not involve significant reform of U.S. privacy and national security provisions. Heated trans-Atlantic disputes involving assertions of extraterritorial extensions of regulatory power is an inappropriate place for a constitutional court like the CJEU to throw its declarative weight around. 

A Comparative Analysis of E-Collaboration Research Funding in the European Union and the United States

2009 ◽  
pp. 40-48
Author(s):  
Ned Kock ◽  
Pedro Antunes
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
The United States ◽  
Government Funding ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Government Investment ◽  
Research Tradition ◽  
Steady Growth ◽  
The U.S ◽  
The Eu

Much of the funding for research and development initiatives in the area of e-collaboration comes from government agencies in various countries. Government funding of e-collaboration research in the European Union (EU) and the United States (U.S.), in particular, seems to be experiencing steady growth in recent years. In the EU, a key initiative to promote governmental investment in e-collaboration research is the Collaboration@Work initiative. This initiative is one of the EU’s Information Society Technologies Directorate General’s main priorities. In the U.S., government investment in e-collaboration research is channeled through several government branches and organizations, notably the National Science Foundation. There are key differences in the approaches used for government funding of e-collaboration research in the EU and U.S. Among other differences, the EU model appears to foster research that is aligned with the action research tradition, whereas the U.S. model places emphasis on research that is better aligned with the experimental research tradition.

US Perspectives on the EU Medical Device Approval System, and Lessons Learned from the United States

2013 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 443-464
Author(s):  
Christa Altenstetter
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
Medical Devices ◽  
The United States ◽  
Interdisciplinary Studies ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Science Literature ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The U.S ◽  
The Eu

The literature on the regulation of drugs at the FDA and the European Union is substantial, yet little research has provided comparative analyses and robust empirical data on the regulation of medical devices in the United States and the European Union. As medical and health markets become increasingly globalized, and the U.S. and the EU compete for leadership and recognition, salient domestic regulatory issues are becoming increasingly international and transnational policy issues. Building on Carpenter's (2010) work on drug regulation at the FDA, but taking a slightly narrower yet at the same time a broader approach by drawing on interdisciplinary studies instead of limiting ourselves to only the Political Science literature, this comparison focuses on key aspects of risk regulation and governance of medical devices in the U.S. and the EU, and shows how and why individual and organizational learning is imperative in each case.

Safe Country Provisions in Canada and in the European Union: A Critical Assessment

1997 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 569-590 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nazaré Albuquerque Abell
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
Geneva Convention ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Critical Assessment ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
Legal Constraints

This article analyzes the international legal framework that surrounds the issue of safe third country (STC) in the European Union and in Canada. The argument put forward is that Canada is not immune to the developments in the European Union and that Canada's immigration policies towards refugees have changed accordingly. My position is that the Canadian model respects the legal constraints which govern the acceptability of mechanisms to apportion responsibility to examine a claim to refugee status, in particular the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. By testing the international legal viability of both the European and the Canadian system of safe third country against Articles 31 and 33 of the Geneva Convention and Executive Committee Conclusion No. 58 and Conclusion No. 15, and by addressing the draft Memorandum of Understanding between Canada and the United States and comparing it with some of the readmission agreements between the European Union and some third states, the article concludes that the Canadian STC model is preferable to that in Europe from both a legal and a humane point of view.

scholarly journals Der militärische Arm der Europäischen Union

2006 ◽  
Vol 36 (144) ◽  
pp. 381-395
Author(s):  
Guglielmo Carchedi
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
The United States ◽  
Military Power ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Potential Threat ◽  
European Currency ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Real Danger

This essay examines whether the European Union, already the most powerful economic and financial rival of the United States, can develop its military arm to a level compatible with its economic and financial weight. It concludes by suggesting a parallel between European currency and the European military. The ECU started as virtual money that evolved into the Euro to become a real danger for the U.S. dollar. At this point, the nascent EU army is only a potential threat to a still unchallenged U.S. military power, but a parallel and ominous evolution is under way.

scholarly journals The Governance of Kosovo: Security Council Resolution 1244 and the Establishment and Functioning of eulex

2009 ◽  
Vol 103 (1) ◽  
pp. 83-96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erika de Wet
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Police Officers ◽  
The United States ◽  
Operating Costs ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Department Of State ◽  
The Common ◽  
The U.S

On February 4,2008, shortly before Kosovo's controversial unilateral secession from Serbia on February 17 of that year, the Council of the European Union (EU) adopted a Joint Action creating the European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo/EULEX (hereinafter EULEX), the largest and most important mission thus far undertaken within the common European foreign and defense policy. Although EULEX is first and foremost a European undertaking, it is also strongly backed by the United States, which agreed to shoulder 25 percent of the operating costs while the remaining costs would be shared by European and other states. In October 2008, the U.S. Department of State further agreed to provide EULEX with eighty police officers and up to eight judges and prosecutors.

scholarly journals Estimation of Demand for Wheat by Classes for the United States and the European Union

1999 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 158-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samarendu Mohanty ◽  
E. Wesley F. Peterson
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
Common Wheat ◽  
The United States ◽  
High Protein ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Complementary Relationship ◽  
Export Subsidies ◽  
The U.S ◽  
The Eu

This study estimates demand for wheat differentiated by classes using a dynamic AIDS model for the United States and the European Union (EU). The results suggest that imported wheat is more price responsive than domestic wheat in the U.S. market but not in the EU market. This may suggest that the Canadian policy that reduces prices of Canadian wheat in the U.S. market or U.S. export subsidies that raise prices of U.S. wheat could be expected to give rise to substantial substitution of Canadian for U.S. wheat. It is also found that in the EU, complementary relationships exist between spring and other wheat groups. This complementary relationship between the lower and higher quality wheat in the EU is not surprising because EU millers blend cheaper wheat such as EU common wheat and U.S. other wheat with high protein (spring) to obtain the preferred characteristics.

Trade Commitments and Data Flows: The National Security Wildcard

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (S1) ◽  
pp. S49-S62
Author(s):  
NORMAN ZHANG
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
National Security ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Acceptable Standard ◽  
Data Flows ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThis paper poses a hypothetical WTO challenge to the Passenger Name Records (PNR) Transfer Agreements the European Union has signed with the United States (as well as Australia and Canada). The focus will be on a possible citation of GATS Article XIV National Security Exception by the EU, and the viability of such a defense. Because of the absence of case law, this paper will also attempt to synthesize an acceptable standard for assessing GATS National Security Exception citations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document