Why America’s Courts Still Matter to Europe

The article does not dismiss concerns about the pressures facing U.S. courts. Rather, it explains why those concerns should not obscure the institutional resilience of the American judicial system — or the practical importance of that system for Europe. Nearly a thousand lawsuits challenging actions of the current administration are pending in U.S. courts, brought by states, municipalities, companies, universities, civil society organizations and private individuals. Their outcomes may have significant consequences not only for the rule of law in the United States, but also for European interests.

A recent Supreme Court decision involving the Trump administration’s attempt to impose new restrictions on mail-in voting is a reminder, Stute argues, that the president who appoints a judge is not a reliable proxy for how that judge will decide a case.  The article also explains why references to “the American court system” can be misleading. The United States has a highly decentralized judiciary. That institutional complexity makes the judiciary harder to capture or describe in simple partisan terms.

For Europe, this matters in concrete ways. German and other European companies have recently achieved important victories in U.S. courts, including in antitrust, tax, product-liability and tariff disputes. American courts are increasingly important in another respect as well: the enforcement of arbitral awards. After the European Court of Justice narrowed enforcement avenues for many intra-EU investment arbitration awards, European companies have turned to U.S. courts. RWE’s effort to enforce an arbitral award against Spain in federal court in Washington, D.C., illustrates why, for some claimants, American courts may remain a forum of last resort.

Stute closes by noting that the challenges facing the American judiciary and the transatlantic relationship are real, but Europe should not write off American courts.

Click here to read the full article (in German).