“Illustration from Jules Verne’s From the Earth to the Moon” Smithsonian Institution
Juan Davalos
Emory University School of Law
Abstract. The era of commercial space travel and the rise of abundant spacefaring nations has led to an increase in space activity, which has outpaced international space laws—laws that were originally imagined for state-sponsored space travel in an arena with only two spacefaring states. International space law began with the creation of the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space in 1959 and the 1967 Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, and has continued with conventions from the United Nations and treaties among nations, including the United States and the European Union, which have attempted to address the rise of commercial space travel. However, throughout this evolution in space law, significant ambiguities in terms and regulations have persisted. This Comment calls for a more uniform and clear description of the terms and regulations that govern international space law and leadership from the United Nations in establishing these regulations among the spacefaring nations of the world.
Specifically, this Comment discusses the importance of creating uniform and unambiguous definitions for terms of art within the field of international space law such as “space object,” the delineation of Earth’s air space, and “outer space” itself, as well as the importance of clarifying how a state becomes a launching state among several parties. Part I gives a history of the background of international space law from its inception in 1959 to the current day. Part II looks at the various national and regional attempts to codify and interpret domestic space law and the similarities and differences between these regulatory schemes. Part III analyzes the United Nations’ most recent attempts to clarify the ambiguities in international space law and how those recent attempts fall short of actual clarification. Finally, Part IV presents possible clarifications to the terms and regulations discussed in Parts I, II, and III.
