Abstract
In 2020, the United States National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) awarded four contracts to commercial companies to collect lunar resources as part of its Artemis program. This contract was the culmination of a controversial shift in global space policy, as it came shortly after an executive order from President Donald J. Trump. That executive order articulated America’s policy to encourage “public and private recovery and use of resources in outer space,” and to seek international support in doing so. Further, it reaffirmed the 2015 U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act (the “Space Act”), which entitled American individuals and corporations to any space resource they obtained, including rights to possess, own, transport, use, and sell such resources.
This innovative law has not come without its critics. Indeed, the Space Act garnered substantial international opposition.This Note pushes back on these criticisms, arguing for the merits of U.S. “friendly unilateralism” in the realm of extraterrestrial resource extraction, especially as the post–Cold War international order deteriorates. It argues that the Outer Space Treaty’s ambiguity regarding national appropriation impedes progress; and that by leading the development of a U.S.- driven legal framework on the Moon, the United States can secure the economic and strategic advantages of space while fostering a new legal regime that promotes democratic governance and international peace. If the United States does not lead the way, then one of two undesirable scenarios will likely occur: either another powerful spacefaring nation (i.e., Russia or China) will take charge, or no nation will take charge, leading to a lunar free-for-all.
The world—or, better said, universe—of international space law is rapidly evolving. While many of these ideas have been discussed in previous academic literature, this Note is unique in that its arguments and analysis consider the ongoing war in Ukraine and the most recent developments in spacefaring and the Artemis program. Part II begins by providing an overview of the private space resource industry and the emerging potential of extraterrestrial resource extraction. Part III shifts to a discussion of relevant international space law. Part IV explores “astropolitics” —how space emerged as a political frontier. Part V advocates the merits of American “friendly unilateralism” in shaping space law, ensuring that liberal democracies establish spacefaring principles that maximize humanity’s benefits from the cosmos.
Recommended Citation
Sam Grossman,
That's One Small Sale for Man: On the Merits of American Unilateralism in the Evolution of International Space Law,
48 Fordham Int'l L.J. 923
().
Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ilj/vol48/iss4/4
