Maryland Journal of International Law Volume 29 Issue 1 Symposium: "The International Law and Article 10 Politics of External Intervention in Internal Conflicts" and Special Issue: "Politics of Religious Freedom" Russian Roulette: The aM gnitsky Act’s Implications for U.S.-Russian Relations in an Increasingly Precarious Legislative Game Hillary Evans Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu/mjil Recommended Citation Hillary Evans, Russian Roulette: The Magnitsky Act’s Implications for U.S.-Russian Relations in an Increasingly Precarious Legislative Game, 29 Md. J. Int'l L. 210 (2014). Available at: http://digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu/mjil/vol29/iss1/10 This Notes & Comments is brought to you for free and open access by the Academic Journals at DigitalCommons@UM Carey Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Maryland Journal of International Law by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@UM Carey Law. For more information, please contact
[email protected]. NOTE Russian Roulette: The Magnitsky Act’s Implications for U.S.-Russian Relations in an Increasingly Precarious Legislative Game † HILLARY EVANS INTRODUCTION On December 28, 2012, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed the controversial Dima Yakovlev bill1 into law, which the Duma had passed one week earlier.2 Formally entitled the “Federal Law On Sanctions for Individuals Violating Fundamental Human Rights and Freedoms of the Citizens of the Russian Federation,” U.S. officials widely condemned the law for its banning of American adoptions of Russian children as well as halting those adoptions already in progress.3 However, the adoption bill was only part of a broader scheme of several measures directed against the United States, which † J.D., 2014, University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law; Executive Notes Editor, 2013-2014, Maryland Journal of International Law; B.A., 2011, Vanderbilt University.