Resolving the disjunction between cultural property policy and law: A call for reform

Andrew L. Adler, Stephen Urice

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Cultural property policy in the United States has become increasingly lawless, for lack of a better term. In recent years, the executive branch has aggressively restricted the movement of cultural property into the United States, but it has repeatedly done so without regard for constraining legal authority. The result is a troubling disjunction between the executive branch's (the "Executive") current cultural property policies and the existing legal framework established by Congress and the Judiciary. We document that disjunction in this Article. We explain, for example, how the executive branch has recently repatriated an Egyptian sarcophagus and an antique French automobile to their respective countries of origin, but it disregarded well-established judicial authority in the process. We explain how the executive branch has similarly sought to repatriate cultural objects to Italy, Peru, and Southeast Asia by relying on statutory authority that Congress plainly never designed for such a purpose. And we explain how the executive branch has imposed comprehensive import restrictions on cultural property from around the world without satisfying all of the statutory requirements mandated by Congress. In addition to documenting this disjunction between policy and law, we situate it in its broader context. We submit that the disjunction reflects an outdated legal framework. That framework is the product of the 1970s, when the cultural property field was still forming, and it has not incorporated the dramatic political and normative developments of the last three decades. We further explain how the executive branch's willingness to disregard statutory constraints raises serious and unresolved separation of powers concerns. This precarious constitutional dynamic undermines the democratic process and invites arbitrary policymaking. We therefore argue that statutory reform is necessary to resolve the disjunction, modernize the legal framework, and restore the rule of law. We conclude by offering suggestions for reform.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)117-163
Number of pages47
JournalRutgers Law Review
Volume64
Issue number1
StatePublished - Jan 1 2011

Fingerprint

reform
Law
trade barrier
separation of powers
country of origin
judiciary
constitutional state
Peru
Southeast Asia
motor vehicle
Italy
lack

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Law

Cite this

Resolving the disjunction between cultural property policy and law : A call for reform. / Adler, Andrew L.; Urice, Stephen.

In: Rutgers Law Review, Vol. 64, No. 1, 01.01.2011, p. 117-163.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{2e7af378516b4a60b3bbe08e43707702,
title = "Resolving the disjunction between cultural property policy and law: A call for reform",
abstract = "Cultural property policy in the United States has become increasingly lawless, for lack of a better term. In recent years, the executive branch has aggressively restricted the movement of cultural property into the United States, but it has repeatedly done so without regard for constraining legal authority. The result is a troubling disjunction between the executive branch's (the {"}Executive{"}) current cultural property policies and the existing legal framework established by Congress and the Judiciary. We document that disjunction in this Article. We explain, for example, how the executive branch has recently repatriated an Egyptian sarcophagus and an antique French automobile to their respective countries of origin, but it disregarded well-established judicial authority in the process. We explain how the executive branch has similarly sought to repatriate cultural objects to Italy, Peru, and Southeast Asia by relying on statutory authority that Congress plainly never designed for such a purpose. And we explain how the executive branch has imposed comprehensive import restrictions on cultural property from around the world without satisfying all of the statutory requirements mandated by Congress. In addition to documenting this disjunction between policy and law, we situate it in its broader context. We submit that the disjunction reflects an outdated legal framework. That framework is the product of the 1970s, when the cultural property field was still forming, and it has not incorporated the dramatic political and normative developments of the last three decades. We further explain how the executive branch's willingness to disregard statutory constraints raises serious and unresolved separation of powers concerns. This precarious constitutional dynamic undermines the democratic process and invites arbitrary policymaking. We therefore argue that statutory reform is necessary to resolve the disjunction, modernize the legal framework, and restore the rule of law. We conclude by offering suggestions for reform.",
author = "Adler, {Andrew L.} and Stephen Urice",
year = "2011",
month = "1",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "64",
pages = "117--163",
journal = "Rutgers Law Review",
issn = "0036-0465",
publisher = "Rutgers University",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Resolving the disjunction between cultural property policy and law

T2 - A call for reform

AU - Adler, Andrew L.

AU - Urice, Stephen

PY - 2011/1/1

Y1 - 2011/1/1

N2 - Cultural property policy in the United States has become increasingly lawless, for lack of a better term. In recent years, the executive branch has aggressively restricted the movement of cultural property into the United States, but it has repeatedly done so without regard for constraining legal authority. The result is a troubling disjunction between the executive branch's (the "Executive") current cultural property policies and the existing legal framework established by Congress and the Judiciary. We document that disjunction in this Article. We explain, for example, how the executive branch has recently repatriated an Egyptian sarcophagus and an antique French automobile to their respective countries of origin, but it disregarded well-established judicial authority in the process. We explain how the executive branch has similarly sought to repatriate cultural objects to Italy, Peru, and Southeast Asia by relying on statutory authority that Congress plainly never designed for such a purpose. And we explain how the executive branch has imposed comprehensive import restrictions on cultural property from around the world without satisfying all of the statutory requirements mandated by Congress. In addition to documenting this disjunction between policy and law, we situate it in its broader context. We submit that the disjunction reflects an outdated legal framework. That framework is the product of the 1970s, when the cultural property field was still forming, and it has not incorporated the dramatic political and normative developments of the last three decades. We further explain how the executive branch's willingness to disregard statutory constraints raises serious and unresolved separation of powers concerns. This precarious constitutional dynamic undermines the democratic process and invites arbitrary policymaking. We therefore argue that statutory reform is necessary to resolve the disjunction, modernize the legal framework, and restore the rule of law. We conclude by offering suggestions for reform.

AB - Cultural property policy in the United States has become increasingly lawless, for lack of a better term. In recent years, the executive branch has aggressively restricted the movement of cultural property into the United States, but it has repeatedly done so without regard for constraining legal authority. The result is a troubling disjunction between the executive branch's (the "Executive") current cultural property policies and the existing legal framework established by Congress and the Judiciary. We document that disjunction in this Article. We explain, for example, how the executive branch has recently repatriated an Egyptian sarcophagus and an antique French automobile to their respective countries of origin, but it disregarded well-established judicial authority in the process. We explain how the executive branch has similarly sought to repatriate cultural objects to Italy, Peru, and Southeast Asia by relying on statutory authority that Congress plainly never designed for such a purpose. And we explain how the executive branch has imposed comprehensive import restrictions on cultural property from around the world without satisfying all of the statutory requirements mandated by Congress. In addition to documenting this disjunction between policy and law, we situate it in its broader context. We submit that the disjunction reflects an outdated legal framework. That framework is the product of the 1970s, when the cultural property field was still forming, and it has not incorporated the dramatic political and normative developments of the last three decades. We further explain how the executive branch's willingness to disregard statutory constraints raises serious and unresolved separation of powers concerns. This precarious constitutional dynamic undermines the democratic process and invites arbitrary policymaking. We therefore argue that statutory reform is necessary to resolve the disjunction, modernize the legal framework, and restore the rule of law. We conclude by offering suggestions for reform.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84920714312&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84920714312&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84920714312

VL - 64

SP - 117

EP - 163

JO - Rutgers Law Review

JF - Rutgers Law Review

SN - 0036-0465

IS - 1

ER -