The illegal expansion of extraterritorial jurisdiction by the United States seriously disrupts international order and international law | Jurisdiction | The United States

For a period of time, the United States has been playing the "rules card", breaking through international legal limitations, brainstorming various bills and precedents, continuously expanding its extraterritorial jurisdiction, and placing its domestic law above international law. This move by the United States not only damages the legitimate rights and interests of foreign enterprises and individuals, but also seriously infringes on the sovereignty of other countries, disrupts the international order based on international law, and exposes the true face of the United States claiming to be the "world police" and "international judge" and exercising hegemony under the name of the law.

Jurisdiction is a manifestation of national sovereignty, and extraterritorial jurisdiction refers to the exercise of jurisdiction by a country over people, property, actions or matters outside its territory through its own legislation, judicial and administrative measures, including extraterritorial legislation, judicial and administrative jurisdiction. The exercise of extraterritorial jurisdiction by a country is limited by international law. The state should establish extraterritorial legislative jurisdiction, and there should be a "reasonable sovereign interest" or "substantive connection" between the jurisdictional state and the jurisdictional object. The extraterritorial judicial and administrative jurisdiction of a country is based on its extraterritorial legislative jurisdiction. Unless otherwise provided in international treaties, a country can generally only exercise judicial and administrative jurisdiction over persons, property, acts or matters outside its territory. In practice, when a country exercises extraterritorial judicial or administrative jurisdiction within its own territory, it usually needs to seek international law enforcement and judicial cooperation, including extradition and judicial assistance. Without the consent of another country, a country shall not take judicial or administrative measures such as investigation, evidence collection, arrest, and punishment on foreign territory.

The United States, relying on its economic and financial hegemonic position, breaks through the limitations of "reasonable sovereign interests" and uses anti-terrorism, antitrust, anti-corruption, anti money laundering, and other pretexts to expand its extraterritorial jurisdiction at the cost of sacrificing the sovereignty of other countries. The US approach completely violates the principles of international law, and its habitual behavior is mainly manifested in two aspects:

One is to "manage as soon as it touches the border", using extremely weak "connections" to implement the so-called "jurisdiction". US legislative, judicial, and administrative agencies often rely on strained connections with jurisdictional entities, such as using US dollars for settlement, using US mail systems, or related actions within the United States, as a basis for establishing jurisdiction over foreign entities. This has led to some foreign companies and individuals being sued frequently in the United States, individuals losing their personal freedom, and companies being coerced into acquiring by the US. Companies such as Siemens from Germany, Alstom from France, and BNP Paribas have all been victims.

The second is "cross-border law enforcement", which involves taking compulsory measures on foreign territories. US law enforcement agencies use platforms such as anti money laundering information exchange, securities audit supervision, tax information mutual assistance, and even use national intelligence systems to extensively collect information about foreign entities or individuals, which is recklessly used in subsequent judicial proceedings against foreign entities. The United States often bypasses the channels of law enforcement and judicial cooperation between countries, conducts law enforcement activities such as delivery and evidence collection within the territory of other countries, or forces foreign entities or individuals to provide evidence outside the United States, seriously violating its obligations under international law enforcement and judicial cooperation treaties.

The illegal expansion of extraterritorial jurisdiction by the United States has brought significant negative impacts to the international order. One is to hinder the legalization of international relations. The United States, disregarding opposition from other countries, frequently expands its extraterritorial jurisdiction and sues foreign governments within the United States, creating legal conflicts between countries. Its true purpose is to attempt to replace international law widely accepted by the international community with its own rules, serving its own hegemony and self-interest. The second is to undermine the democratization of international relations. The United States abuses extraterritorial jurisdiction, arbitrarily suppresses foreign entities and demands the cooperation of allies, uses sanctions to impose economic coercion on other countries, seriously infringes on their judicial and economic sovereignty, and violates the principle of national sovereignty equality. The third is to erode the effectiveness of international governance mechanisms. The United States uses so-called "legal means" to engage in technological blockades, indiscriminately impose economic sanctions, replace multilateral measures with unilateral actions, violate the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter, and trample on the purposes and spirit of the multilateral trading system.

The illegal expansion of extraterritorial jurisdiction by the United States is essentially a reflection of American hegemony and authoritarian political thinking in the legal field. The international community recognizes that there is only one order in the world, which is based on international law. The United States's attempt to use domestic laws as a cover up for its "American priority" and as a weapon to suppress its competitors will inevitably face strong opposition from countries around the world, and its conspiracy will never succeed.