The International Court of Justice (ICJ) serves as the primary judicial organ of the United Nations. While the court has become a critical tool for states seeking to hold others accountable for acts of genocide, its strict evidentiary standards have often hindered its ability to find states liable. In the ongoing case of The Gambia v. Myanmar, the court’s high threshold for proving specific "intent to destroy" raises concerns about whether justice will truly be served and the ICJ's potential to adequately uphold the Genocide Convention in future cases. Volume XLVIII staff editor Amanda Núñez examines how the ICJ’s current framework may be setting the bar too high and explores proposed reforms to the interpretation of the special intent standard that could enhance the court's ability to uphold the Genocide Convention.

The United States has long struggled with addressing the historical injustices committed against Native American tribes. While New Zealand has made significant strides in offering reparations to its Indigenous Māori tribes, including financial settlements and land returns, the U.S. has yet to adopt a comprehensive reparations program. Volume XLVIII staff editor Erin Duddy explores how the U.S. can learn from New Zealand's approach to reparations, exploring how the United States can make a more robust acknowledgment of past wrongs.

Cryptocurrency regulation varies globally, with some countries embracing it and others banning it. Tax systems also differ, complicating global enforcement. Staffer Matthew DegliObizzi argues that a unified international framework, similar to international tax and trade treaties, is needed to ensure consistent regulation and taxation across nations regarding digital currency.