Private international policy involves legal debate in global exchange which can be hampered by overt strategic considerations. Recognition of international law by district courts has been a topic of discussion for more than 400 years without any reasonable agreement so far (Curtis, 2020). Public policy considerations after Old Anglo-American rule are confounded by the many procedures courts might use to order unfamiliar rules. The distinction between procedure and meaning is a flexible tool for more Anglo-American courts to decide whether to apply an unusual rule.
Foreign laws that violate the morality and pride of the forum can be rejected to avoid forming bad evidence under court scrutiny and influencing regulatory decisions. Moral standards were used to reject contracts of prostitution, slave ownership, and deviant marriages. The due diligence approach is used by British courts to prevent inappropriate or unethical outcomes, particularly in disputes over personal status (Curtis, 2020). The standard of coercion is used by French courts to ignore their challenges to regulatory directives, especially when challenging established consensual claims.
References
Curtis A, B. (2020). 1 court, foreign affairs, and the structural constitution. In International Law in the US Legal System. Oxford University Press. Web.