The University of Georgia School of Law’s spring 2025 International Law Colloquium recently hosted Temple Law’s Trang (Mae) Nguyen, who presented her working paper, “Goods’ Nationalities.” Pamela Foohey, Allen Post Professor of Law at Georgia Law, served as Nguyen’s faculty discussant.

Nguyen is an Associate Professor of Law at the Temple University Beasley School of Law and is an Affiliated Scholar at the U.S.-Asia Law Institute at the New York University School of Law. Her research focuses on business law, contracts, transnational law, and international law. Nguyen also previously held research appointments at the University of Hong Kong Faculty of Law, the National University of Singapore Centre for Asian Legal Studies, and the Singapore Management University Yong Pung How School of Law.

Below is an abstract of Nguyen’s working paper:

Products’ nationalities are at the center of today’s fast-changing global order. The Trump administration’s liberal use of tariffs against friends and foes, sanctions against Russian products, the banning of Chinese goods, and efforts to revitalize American manufacturing, to name just a few, all hinge on classifications of where a product is deemed “from.” But in today’s globalized economy, what exactly makes something “American” or “Chinese” or of any other nationality, for that matter?

This Article reexamines how goods acquire their designated nationalities at a time when such designation matters well beyond traditional commerce. It advances two main arguments. First, a product’s nationality is not fixed; rather, it is malleable and can vary depending upon the substantive legal regime under which the good is regulated—once predominantly trade law but now increasingly through a trade-security nexus and a trade-human rights nexus. Second, such malleability occurs through what I call an “attribute selection” process. In effect, each legal regime pivots the nationality analysis on certain “attributes” of a product, swapping and switching them as befit underlying interests and policy goals. The construction of product nationality thus occurs through mapping two separate sets of variables: first, the bundle of attributes of a product, and second, the “prisms” through which laws place significance on these attributes.

This Article makes several contributions. First, descriptively, it charts an updated account on product nationality’s expanded use, particularly in trade law’s nexus with national security and human rights. Second, conceptually, building on this updated descriptive account, it advances a novel framework—the attribute selection process—to unpack the making of product nationality. Third, normatively, it underscores how the need to use product nationality as proxy fits uneasily with the reality of global production, and how efforts to move away from nationality-based rules are likely vulnerable to similar challenges. Ultimately, while the Article makes clear that the concept of nationality is doing heavy lifting across various legal fields, it does not take a strong normative stand, opting instead to explain why taking a strong normative position is premature during fast evolving developments. Finally, the Article offers some practical considerations for policymakers, businesses, and other stakeholders as they consider product-nationality regulations going forward.

This year, Professor Desirée LeClercq is overseeing the colloquium, which is designed to introduce students to features of international economic law through engagement with scholars in the international legal field. To view the full list of International Law Colloquium speakers, visit our website.

This program is made possible through the Kirbo Trust Endowed Faculty Enhancement Fund and the Talmadge Law Faculty Fund.