This Essay responds to Lea Brilmayer and Dan Listwa’s criticisms of the Draft Restatement (Third) of Conflict of Laws. We appreciate their engagement. As a general matter, we disagree about the nature and purpose of restatements. More specifically, we disagree about the history and aims of the Restatements of Conflict of Laws. Brilmayer and Listwa’s main criticism—that the drafters of the Restatement (Third) are not authoritatively interpreting any single state’s law and therefore can be only persuasive authority as to the content of a state’s law—could apply to all restatements. But since this Draft Restatement, like other restatements, draws its rules from decided cases, the criticism makes little sense even on its own terms.
Draft Restatement of Conflict of Laws, American Law Institute, legal criticism
Yale Law Journal Forum
Roosevelt, Kermit III and Jones, Bethan R., "The Draft Restatement (Third) of Conflict of Laws: A Response to Brilmayer & Listwa" (2018). Faculty Scholarship at Penn Carey Law. 2952.