Articles
Date posted: 2-24-2026
Eli Lilly v. Canada was an investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) case widely noted for signaling a regime shift in intellectual property (IP) protection from the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) to ISDS. Its true yet often overlooked significance, however, lies in being a case of first impression on whether judicial interpretation of IP law may serve as a basis for state responsibility independent of denial of justice. To bridge that gap, this Note undertakes a close reading of the novel doctrinal discussion in Eli Lilly and related precedents, drawing implications for the broader theory of state responsibility arising from substantive judicial acts. It then applies those implications to domestic IP regimes through a comparative lens, with particular attention to common law jurisdictions, where judicial interpretation plays a central role in developing IP law. This Note argues that Eli Lilly suggests judicial lawmaking may be reviewable by ISDS tribunals as a basis for state responsibility, akin to legislative or executive acts, thereby exposing common law IP regimes to heightened risk of investor-state disputes. Nevertheless, the “regulatory chill” of which scholars have warned as a result of Eli Lilly may be overstated. Any reading of the decision as offering a promising pathway to overturn domestic judicial lawmaking solely on the basis of reduced IP protection is likely too optimistic.
Scaling Sustainable Propellants to Address Rocket Emissions: Lessons From the U.S. Aviation Industry
Zhizhou (Josie) Liu
Date posted: 3-24-2026
The rapid growth of the U.S. commercial space industry has exposed a profound regulatory gap in addressing rocket emissions. By releasing greenhouse gases and particulates like black carbon, alumina, and water vapor, rocket launches not only contribute to climate change but also accelerate stratospheric ozone depletion. The U.S. aviation industry encountered similar environmental challenges decades ago, which eventually prompted legal and policy frameworks to curtail aviation emission through sustainable fuel technologies. Unlike aviation, however, the space industry now operates in a legal vacuum, with no binding international environmental standards or domestic regulations targeting rocket atmospheric pollution. As rocket emissions penetrate into every layer of the atmosphere, their environmental risks are even more intensified and distinct from aviation emissions. This Note argues that sustainable rocket technologies, such as green propellants and green non-chemical propulsion systems, offer an effective pathway to contain rocket emissions. Drawing lessons from the U.S. aviation industry’s gradual regulatory evolution, the Note proposes that a proactive regulatory framework, including industry-specific emission standards, incentive programs, and international collaboration, is critical for the U.S. space industry to avoid replicating aviation’s delayed response and to ensure that the new space era proceeds within environmentally sustainable bounds.
Topic: Space, Sustainable Technology