Habitual residence has now become an internationally accepted connecting factor in conflict of laws and is widely being used as an alternative to, or replacement of, domicile. This concept, however, remains remote to American conflict of laws. Although the use of habitual residence in the U.S. courts is mandated by the codification of the Hague Child Abduction Convention, there is still a lack of general acceptance in American conflict of law literature. The Article argues that habitual residence should be adopted as a conflict of law connecting factor in American conflict of laws, and it would be unwise for the U.S. to stay isolated from the rest of the world. The ongoing drafting of the Restatement (Third) of Conflict of Laws provides a great opportunity to reposition American Conflict of Laws so that the international issues would be properly and adequately addressed. Habitual residence is such an issue that the Restatement (Third) could not, and should not, ignore.
Habitual Residence v. Domicile: A Challenge Facing American Conflicts of Laws,
Me. L. Rev.
Available at: https://digitalcommons.mainelaw.maine.edu/mlr/vol70/iss2/2