Foster v. Neilson is one of the case laws that have been used to determine cases involving states. In this particular instance, Foster brought an issue before the court regarding a tract of land that had been bought in Louisiana. The tract of land had been granted by the Spanish governor at that time. The court was to determine whether a treaty can be considered to be a law before it is ratified and confirmed by a legislature act. In other words, the court was expected to rule on whether the terms of the treaty could be applied before they are ratified by a legislative act as required by the terms in it. The judges held that a treated cannot be considered to be a law in cases where the terms of the agreement sets out that it must be ratified through a legislative act. The treaty will only become a law after it is ratified by the legislature. Until that a time, the treat by itself cannot be operated as a law. It is only after the legislature passes the required act that the treaty will become a binding contract and a law by itself. This was a controversial case that involved nations and the issue of boundaries. At that particular time, there was no common tribunal that could be used to determine such land and boundary cases. In addition, each state had its own rights that could not be adjusted at the time of dispute. While the judiciary is not a government department, it helped in asserting and determining the interests of the interested parties. Furthermore, it set out a ruling that has been used to determine some national and land issues that have arose over the years. Based on the case, it is evident that the treaties could only be applied after they were ratified by the legislative body.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
