Fire fighter, Doctor, Ballerina, or Vegetarian
As a child adults
always ask you what you want to be when you grow up. How many people
answered fire fighter, doctor, ballerina, or
vegetarian (veterinarian)? I always gave two answers: one that would
change day to day, hour to hour, minute to minute (I’m flighty that way)
and a lawyer. While my
flightiness in what I want to be when I grow up hasn’t waned (even
though technically I am an adult) my interest in the law and all its
possibilities hasn’t changed.
When going to
university I studied, of course, political science. That seemed to be
what everyone did who wanted to go into law; I wanted to argue, make a
name for myself. I wanted to make money.
I took classes ranging from political philosophy (boring…
definitely don’t want to be a philosopher) to International Economic
Policy (lots of numbers that don’t mean anything, that’s why I like
economics). But the one class that stood out most, the one I still talk
about today, is the International Law course I took one summer at UCSC.
International law
while somewhat old is still a rather new and emerging field. There are
precedents that date back to what seems like the dawn of time between
neighboring governments and the use of green commons (pastures used by
all). These laws dictated who could do what and when, how many animals a
single herder could have on the green at one time, and whether or not
these areas were rotated season to season. Basic you might think but
when it comes to independently acting states cooperation is normally not
done because it’s fair or nice; countries need to know what they get out
of it. International bodies like the UN have laws that those who sign as
members are “required” to follow.
States are independent so while they may sign on to international
treaties they don’t have to follow them. And, if you have paid attention
to the news lately, the ways in which countries may interpret these laws
can vary. What one country may see as a war criminal another may see
them as a war hero. Torture to one country may be interrogation tactics
for another. International law is, after all, still law… there are many
different ways to interpret it.
So, while I still
have no idea what I want to be when I grow up (currently I want to be a
librarian) the law still interests me more than anything. Arguing a view
point is fun. Finding those precedents lost after years and years of
sitting on a dusty old law library shelf or hidden in the multitude of
information online and using them to suit your purpose is kinda cool. If
you can take a decision involving a 13th century goat and
apply it to a current homicide how cool is that? I don’t know of any
case like that but hey, it’s possible.
