Curtis Bradley and Mitu Gulati’s stimulating article, “Withdrawing from International Custom,” argues for a view of customary international law (CIL) in which unilateral exit rights may be revitalized. This response suggests that Bradley and Gulati’s understanding of the intellectual history of CIL is contestable and that, they tend both to understate the novelty of their approach and overstate the rigidity of the views to which they react. Their tentativeness in endorsing exit options makes it difficult to assess the normative implications of their position, but their argument notably lacks a comprehensive consideration of alternative lawmaking forms.
GW Paper Series
Duke Journal of Comparative & International Law, Vol. 21, No. 1, 2010