The Legal Personhood of Aliens: Rights, Sovereignty, and Diplomacy Beyond Earth

LLB, 2nd Year | Balaji School of Law, Pune Read More

***This paper has been selected for LegalOnus Law Journal (LLJ) Volume 1, Issue 5, 2025

---

ABSTRACT

The expansion of human civilization into space raises unprecedented legal, ethical, and governance challenges. As scientific advancements in space travel, artificial intelligence, and planetary exploration accelerate, the potential for interplanetary colonization and the discovery of extraterrestrial life becomes increasingly plausible. However, existing international legal frameworks, primarily governed by treaties such as the Outer Space Treaty (1967) and the Moon Agreement (1979), are insufficient to address fundamental questions of sovereignty, legal personhood, and diplomacy in a multiplanetary society. The lack of a comprehensive governance structure raises concerns about territorial claims, environmental exploitation, and interspecies rights. This paper explores three core legal issues that will define the future of interstellar civilization: (1) the recognition of legal personhood for extraterrestrial life, (2) the governance of interplanetary settlements and resource claims, and (3) the establishment of diplomatic protocols for interstellar relations and first contact scenarios. By integrating principles from environmental personhood, space law, and diplomatic theory, this research proposes a groundbreaking legal framework that ensures ethical governance, peaceful cooperation, and the protection of extraterrestrial ecosystems. This study argues that without proactive legal measures, space expansion could lead to conflicts, territorial disputes, and environmental destruction. Through the reinterpretation of existing space treaties and the creation of new legal frameworks, humanity can transition into a multiplanetary civilization while upholding principles of justice, sustainability, and interspecies rights. This paper sets forth a vision for a just, equitable, and cooperative legal order in space exploration and settlement.

Key words: Space Law, Extraterrestrial Life, Legal Personhood, Interplanetary Governance, Diplomatic Protocols, Environmental Protection.

INTRODUCTION

Humanity stands on the precipice of a new era, one in which interplanetary settlement, extraterrestrial encounters, and resource utilization beyond Earth become an undeniable reality. Rapid advancements in space travel, artificial intelligence, and planetary exploration have accelerated the timeline for human expansion beyond Earth’s boundaries[1]. Governments, private corporations, and international organizations are investing heavily in projects aimed at colonizing Mars, extracting resources from asteroids, and conducting deep-space explorations to search for extraterrestrial life[2]. While these technological strides promise a future of interplanetary expansion, they also raise profound legal, ethical, and governance challenges that existing legal systems are unequipped to handle[3]. The fundamental legal principles that govern terrestrial societies sovereignty, legal personhood, and diplomatic relations must now be reconsidered and adapted for a multiplanetary society[4]. However, the absence of a comprehensive legal structure regarding the rights of extraterrestrial life, planetary sovereignty, and interstellar diplomacy creates a significant governance vacuum[5]. This legal uncertainty could lead to conflicts over territorial claims, environmental degradation, and ethical dilemmas concerning the treatment of non-human life forms and the exploitation of celestial resources[6]. As humanity moves closer to becoming a multiplanetary species, the question is no longer whether legal structures should evolve but rather how they should evolve to ensure a fair, just, and sustainable future beyond Earth[7].

This paper seeks to address three key legal questions that will shape the future of space governance:

• Should extraterrestrial life, intelligent or microbial, be granted legal personhood? If extraterrestrial life is discovered, should it be afforded legal rights, and under what conditions? The debate over biological personhood sentient personhood will determine the extent of protections extended to non-human life forms and the legal status of extraterrestrial ecosystems[8].
• How should sovereignty and governance be structured in a multiplanetary society? The Outer Space Treaty (1967) currently prohibits national appropriation of celestial bodies[9], yet private corporations and nations are already engaging in resource extraction and planning extraterrestrial settlements[10]. Should Mars, the Moon, and asteroids be governed by Earth-based authorities, independent planetary governments, or an interplanetary federation?
• What diplomatic mechanisms are necessary to regulate interplanetary relations, including first contact with extraterrestrial civilizations? If humanity encounters intelligent extraterrestrial life, how should diplomatic relations be structured? Should the principles of non-interference and mutual recognition be applied, or should humanity seek to assert dominance over less advanced civilizations? Furthermore, as Earth-based colonies expand across different celestial bodies, how will interplanetary disputes between human settlements be resolved?[11]

By proposing a new interstellar legal framework, this research aims to pioneer solutions that ensure ethical governance of planetary resources and extraterrestrial life, peaceful cooperation among human and non-human civilizations, and environmental protection of celestial bodies to prevent reckless exploitation[12]. As space exploration transitions from government-controlled programs to private commercial enterprises and independent space settlements, legal ambiguity poses one of the greatest challenges to a harmonious interplanetary future[13]. This paper will explore how existing international laws can be reinterpreted and how new legal frameworks can be developed to support a just, sustainable, and cooperative expansion of human civilization beyond Earth.[14]

THE LEGAL PERSONHOOD OF EXTRATERRESTRIAL LIFE

As humanity prepares for interplanetary expansion, the question of legal personhood for extraterrestrial life becomes increasingly significant. While current space law primarily focuses on human activities and territorial restrictions, it fails to address how extraterrestrial life, whether intelligent beings, microbial organisms, or entire ecosystems should be treated under the law.[15] Legal personhood has historically evolved beyond humans to include corporations, artificial intelligence, and even elements of nature[16]. Applying this concept to extraterrestrial life and celestial environments is essential to prevent exploitation, ethical violations, and environmental degradation beyond Earth.

This section explores three key dimensions of extraterrestrial legal personhood:

• Defining Legal Personhood in an Interplanetary Context – What criteria should extraterrestrial life meet to be granted legal rights?
• Environmental Personhood as a Precedent for Celestial Protection – How have legal systems recognized non-human entities, and can this be applied to space?
• The Role of the Space Liability Convention in Extraterrestrial Rights – How can existing treaties be adapted to protect extraterrestrial ecosystems?

By addressing these issues, this paper proposes an innovative legal framework for recognizing and protecting extraterrestrial life in an era of interplanetary exploration.

Defining Legal Personhood in an Interplanetary Context

Legal personhood refers to an entity’s ability to hold rights and obligations under the law. Traditionally reserved for humans, this status has expanded over time to include corporations, artificial intelligence, and even natural entities in certain jurisdictions[17]. The recognition of extraterrestrial life as legal persons presents three fundamental considerations. First, the sentience threshold raises the question of whether legal rights should apply solely to intelligent beings or extend to all life forms, including microbes and planetary ecosystems[18]. If an intelligent alien civilization is discovered, should it be granted legal autonomy comparable to human societies? Conversely, if microbial life exists on Mars or Europa, should it receive protection akin to endangered species on Earth? Additionally, should celestial bodies with complex, life-supporting environments be recognized as legal entities to prevent their destruction?[19] International law currently lacks a clear distinction between biological personhood (for living beings) and environmental personhood (for ecosystems), though terrestrial legal systems have begun recognizing the rights of nature, which could serve as a model for extraterrestrial personhood.[20] Second, ethical and scientific consequences must be considered, as granting legal recognition to extraterrestrial life could prevent harmful exploitation while also limiting scientific exploration.[21] For instance, protecting alien microbes from human interference might restrict biomedical advancements derived from extraterrestrial samples. Similarly, acknowledging planetary rights could challenge commercial interests such as space mining, terraforming, or asteroid extraction.[22] Balancing scientific progress with ethical responsibility is crucial in shaping extraterrestrial personhood policies. Lastly, comparative legal precedents demonstrate that personhood is adaptable to evolving societal and scientific realities. Corporate personhood, recognized in most legal systems, grants rights to artificial entities, while ongoing debates question whether advanced AI should receive limited legal standing.[23] Furthermore, the growing trend of environmental legal personhood, seen in cases where rivers, forests, and ecosystems have been granted rights, establishes a precedent for extending similar recognition to extraterrestrial life.[24] These legal expansions illustrate that personhood is not static and can be adapted to address the novel challenges posed by humanity’s transition into a multiplanetary society.

Environmental Personhood as a Precedent for Celestial Protection

The legal recognition of natural entities has gained momentum in environmental law, offering a potential framework for the protection of celestial bodies.[25] Several key precedents illustrate how legal personhood has been extended to natural environments on Earth, which could serve as a model for space law. In 2008, Ecuador became the first country to enshrine the rights of nature in its constitution, granting ecosystems the right to exist, persist, and regenerate.[26] If this principle were applied to celestial bodies, planets and moons could be legally recognized as entities, preventing reckless terraforming, mining, or contamination. Similarly, in 2017, India’s courts granted legal personhood to the Ganges and Yamuna rivers, allowing lawsuits to be filed on their behalf to prevent pollution and environmental degradation.[27] Applying this approach to extraterrestrial environments, such as Europa’s subsurface ocean, could safeguard these ecosystems from harmful contamination by space missions. New Zealand has also extended legal personhood to the Whanganui River and Te Urewera Forest, appointing human guardians to protect their interests.[28] A similar system could be established for celestial bodies like Mars or Europa, where international space organizations act as legal guardians to oversee their conservation. If these principles were integrated into space law, planets and moons hosting potential life could receive legal recognition and protection. This would prevent contamination by Earth-based microbes, restrict environmentally harmful activities like mining and terraforming in biologically significant areas, and allow legal action against parties responsible for planetary degradation.[29] Recognizing celestial bodies as legal persons would ensure a responsible and sustainable approach to planetary management as human space exploration continues to expand.

The Role of the Space Liability Convention in Extraterrestrial Rights

 The Space Liability Convention (1972) is a key treaty addressing liability for damages caused by space objects, yet it remains inadequate in addressing biological contamination, the protection of alien life forms, and accountability for environmental destruction in space.[30] To ensure that extraterrestrial life and planetary ecosystems are not inadvertently harmed, the treaty could be expanded to recognize celestial bodies as juridical persons, establish liability for ecological damage, and allow third-party entities to file lawsuits on behalf of extraterrestrial environments. Just as environmental NGOs advocate for nature on Earth, organizations like the United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs (UNOOSA) could represent planetary ecosystems, ensuring they receive legal protection.[31] Additionally, the creation of a Space Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA) under the United Nations could regulate commercial space activities, enforce planetary protection protocols, and provide legal mechanisms for prosecuting violators of extraterrestrial conservation laws.[32] By integrating environmental law into space governance, humanity can ensure that celestial bodies and potential extraterrestrial life are treated with dignity, respect, and legal recognition. As space exploration advances, the expansion of the Space Liability Convention and the establishment of dedicated space environmental agencies will be critical in creating an ethical and sustainable legal framework that balances scientific progress with planetary protection.

THE FUTURE OF INTERPLANETARY SOVEREIGNTY

The rapid expansion of space exploration and commercial space activities presents unprecedented legal and governance challenges. While the Outer Space Treaty (1967) provides a foundational legal framework, its principles, particularly the non-appropriation principle are being tested by emerging realities such as private space colonization, resource extraction, and the potential for interplanetary governance. These challenges require a reassessment of sovereignty in space and the development of new legal mechanisms to govern human activities beyond Earth.

The Outer Space Treaty and the Non-Appropriation Principle

The current legal framework governing sovereignty in space is largely shaped by the Outer Space Treaty (OST), which was signed in 1967 and ratified by 111 countries. Article II of the treaty states: “Outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.[33]” This provision establishes space as a global commons, preventing individual nations from claiming ownership over celestial bodies. However, the treaty does not explicitly address private ownership of land, resources, or infrastructure in space.[34] This ambiguity has led to legal conflicts as private companies and some nations seek to expand their interests in space exploration and resource utilization. One of the primary conflicts arising from the non-appropriation principle is the legal status of private space colonies. Companies like SpaceX, Blue Origin, and other private entities have announced plans to establish permanent settlements on Mars and the Moon.[35] However, if a company or private entity establishes a self-sustaining colony on Mars, does it have the right to govern itself independently from Earth? If such a colony becomes functionally independent, should it be subject to Earth-based laws or be allowed to create its own legal and political framework? These questions challenge traditional notions of sovereignty, as the OST does not provide guidelines on the governance of extraterrestrial settlements. A related legal challenge is extraterrestrial resource extraction. The U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act (2015) allows private companies to mine and sell resources extracted from asteroids and celestial bodies.[36] This challenges the traditional view that space resources should be the “common heritage of mankind,” as outlined in the Moon Agreement (1979).[37] Other countries, including Luxembourg and the United Arab Emirates, have enacted similar laws permitting private ownership of space resources.[38] These conflicting legal frameworks create uncertainty regarding who has the right to exploit space resources and under what legal authority.

Several nations have domestic space laws that conflict with the Outer Space Treaty.[39] For example:

• The United States recognizes private ownership of space-mined resources, despite the treaty’s restrictions on national appropriation.
• Luxembourg’s space law explicitly grants companies the right to extract and own extraterrestrial minerals.
• China’s growing space program operates under a framework that prioritizes national interests, raising concerns about future conflicts over territorial rights in space.[40]

These conflicting national policies highlight the limitations of existing international treaties and suggest a need for updated legal agreements that address contemporary space exploration challenges.

Proposed Models for Interplanetary Governance

One potential governance model is an international coalition, modeled after the United Nations, that establishes legal frameworks, mediates disputes, and enforces regulations in space. This approach would provide a structured legal system for regulating space settlements to ensure compliance with international law, preventing territorial disputes between nations and corporations, and managing planetary resources sustainably.[41] A UN-like space governance model would centralize authority and ensure that planetary activities remain peaceful and cooperative. However, critics argue that a bureaucratic global space authority could slow innovation and favor powerful nations over emerging space actors.[42] Additionally, enforcing such regulations on a distant Mars colony or asteroid mining operation could prove difficult.

Decentralized Self-Governance

A second possibility is decentralized self-governance, where planetary colonies operate independently under their own legal and political systems. This model would allow diverse governance structures based on the unique needs of each settlement, political autonomy for space colonies without direct control from Earth, and flexibility in creating economic and social systems. However, a decentralized model raises concerns about the potential for conflict between independent colonies, lack of accountability in environmental and human rights regulations, and economic disparities that could lead to monopolization of space resources.[43] If a private company establishes a Mars colony and enforces its own legal framework, would this create a corporate autocracy? Without international oversight, private entities could potentially monopolize access to extraterrestrial resources, creating economic inequalities between Earth-based nations and space settlements.

Custodianship Model

Another alternative is a custodianship model, where celestial bodies are not governed by nations or corporations but instead held in trust for all of humanity.[44] This model would prevent exclusive territorial claims while still allowing regulated exploration, prioritize environmental conservation to prevent reckless exploitation, and promote international cooperation in managing planetary resources. This model is similar to the Antarctic Treaty System, which prohibits territorial claims and allows only scientific research and peaceful cooperation.[45] Applying a similar framework to space governance could prevent future conflicts over planetary ownership. A Multiplanetary Compact, modeled after the Antarctic Treaty System, could provide a legal structure that prevents territorial disputes while allowing sustainable resource utilization.[46] Such a treaty could establish a neutral governing body for celestial settlements, define acceptable uses of planetary resources to balance economic interests and conservation, and set scientific and ethical guidelines for space colonization. However, enforcement remains a key issue. In Antarctica, international monitoring is possible due to Earth-based enforcement mechanisms, but maintaining oversight over distant Mars colonies or asteroid mining operations presents logistical challenges.[47]

While the Outer Space Treaty remains the foundation of space law, it is clear that new legal mechanisms are needed to address the challenges of private colonization, resource extraction, and planetary governance. The emergence of corporate space exploration, national space programs, and independent space settlements requires a reassessment of sovereignty in space and a transition toward interplanetary legal agreements that promote peace, cooperation, and sustainability. The future of interplanetary sovereignty will depend on how well humanity balances technological ambition with legal and ethical responsibility. As space becomes the next frontier for economic expansion and scientific discovery, it is crucial to establish a governance framework that ensures equitable access, environmental protection, and peaceful coexistence among multiplanetary civilisations.

INTERSTELLAR DIPLOMACY AND THE RIGHTS OF EXTRATERRESTRIAL CIVILIZATIONS

As humanity moves beyond Earth and establishes permanent settlements in space, diplomatic mechanisms will be essential to prevent conflicts, regulate interplanetary trade, and facilitate cooperation.[48] More critically, if humans encounter intelligent extraterrestrial civilizations, a comprehensive legal and ethical framework will be required to manage first contact scenarios, cultural interactions, and rights recognition.[49] The absence of clear diplomatic policies in these areas could lead to territorial disputes, economic exploitation, and unintended interstellar conflicts.[50] Developing interplanetary diplomatic protocols will ensure that human expansion into space is guided by principles of peace, cooperation, and legal order. These diplomatic frameworks will play a crucial role in resolving disputes among human settlements as well as defining humanity’s responsibilities when encountering extraterrestrial civilizations.

Frameworks for Interplanetary Diplomacy and Conflict Resolution

As space exploration advances, the establishment of interplanetary diplomatic frameworks will be necessary to resolve territorial and resource disputes among nations, private companies, and independent colonies, regulate interplanetary trade and commerce to prevent economic exploitation or monopolization of extraterrestrial resources, and develop planetary defense agreements to protect against potential threats from asteroids, space debris, or extraterrestrial entities.[51] One of the biggest challenges in interplanetary governance is the lack of an existing legal framework that addresses diplomatic relations in space. On Earth, international relations are guided by treaties, trade agreements, and diplomatic protocols, but these cannot be directly applied to interplanetary settlements or extraterrestrial civilizations.[52] Instead, a new Interplanetary Diplomatic Charter could be developed to establish legal standards for diplomatic relations between planetary entities. As private corporations, spacefaring nations, and independent settlements expand their presence in space, disputes over territory and resources are inevitable. A clear legal structure will be required to define the legal status of human settlements on celestial bodies, establish mechanisms for dispute resolution between Earth-based nations and space colonies, and prevent the militarization of space settlements through binding agreements.[53] One approach is to create an Interplanetary Arbitration Tribunal, similar to the World Trade Organization’s dispute resolution mechanism, to mediate conflicts.[54] This tribunal could provide a neutral forum to address claims over territorial boundaries, space mining rights, and planetary governance.

Space commerce will be a key driver of economic expansion, but without proper regulations, it could lead to exploitation and inequality between Earth-based corporations and space settlements. Diplomatic frameworks must address regulatory oversight for commercial activities such as asteroid mining, space tourism, and interplanetary shipping, taxation and trade agreements between Earth-based governments and space colonies, and preventing monopolization of extraterrestrial resources by a few powerful entities. A global Interplanetary Trade Organization (ITO) could be established to standardize trade laws and ensure fair competition in space markets. Planetary defense is another area where international cooperation is crucial. Threats such as asteroid impacts, space debris, or even potential hostilities from extraterrestrial civilizations require coordinated responses. A Planetary Defense Treaty could be drafted to establish an interplanetary security council responsible for monitoring space threats, develop an early warning system for near-Earth objects (NEOs) that pose collision risks, and prevent the weaponization of space technology that could be used in future conflicts.[55] The United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs (UNOOSA) could take the lead in developing these diplomatic security measures for interplanetary cooperation.[56]

Legal and Ethical Frameworks for First Contact

If humans encounter intelligent extraterrestrial life, diplomatic protocols must ensure ethical, legal, and peaceful engagement. Without clear guidelines, first contact scenarios could result in cultural misunderstandings, territorial conflicts, or even the unintended destruction of alien civilizations. Three key diplomatic challenges must be addressed: Non-Interference Principles to prevent cultural and technological imperialism, Mutual Recognition of Rights to establish treaties that define the legal status of extraterrestrial beings, and Conflict Prevention Mechanisms to develop interstellar courts to mediate disputes. A non-interference principle would prevent humans from disrupting or exploiting extraterrestrial civilizations.[57] Science fiction particularly Star Trek’s Prime Directive has long debated the ethics of interfering in less advanced civilizations.[58] In legal terms, this principle would prohibit the intentional alteration of extraterrestrial cultures, restrict the introduction of Earth-based technology that could disrupt alien societies, and establish ethical guidelines for cultural exchange and observation. While interaction with intelligent extraterrestrial life may be inevitable, uncontrolled human influence could destabilize alien societies, similar to how colonial expansion on Earth disrupted indigenous civilizations. An Interstellar Non-Interference Treaty could be modeled after existing international agreements that protect indigenous tribes from external interference.[59]

If extraterrestrial civilizations are discovered, humanity must decide whether to recognize them as legal persons under international law. Several legal precedents suggest that non-human entities can be granted legal rights, including corporate personhood, where businesses have legal standing despite being non-human, AI legal recognition, which is debated in some legal frameworks, and environmental personhood, where rivers and ecosystems have been granted legal status in certain nations.[60] An Intergalactic Rights Agreement could be drafted to outline the legal status of extraterrestrial beings under human law, provide a framework for diplomatic recognition of alien civilizations, and establish mutual treaties to ensure peaceful coexistence. Granting legal personhood to extraterrestrial beings would ensure that they are protected from exploitation and have recognized legal standing in interplanetary diplomacy.[61] The International Court of Justice (ICJ) currently handles legal disputes between nations on Earth. A modified version of the ICJ could be adapted to interstellar legal disputes, addressing conflicts between human colonies on different planets, Earth-based governments and independent space settlements, and human entities and extraterrestrial civilizations.[62] A Galactic Court of Justice could serve as an independent body to mediate territorial disputes over celestial bodies, arbitrate trade conflicts between space-based economies, and uphold the rights of extraterrestrial beings. This legal institution could extend the jurisdiction of international law beyond Earth, ensuring that interstellar diplomacy is guided by principles of justice and equality.[63] As space exploration progresses, interstellar diplomacy will become one of the most important aspects of space governance. Whether managing conflicts between human settlements or establishing first contact with extraterrestrial civilizations, legal and diplomatic frameworks will be necessary to prevent chaos and exploitation. By developing an Interplanetary Diplomatic Charter, humanity can ensure that future space interactions are guided by principles of cooperation, ethical responsibility, and legal order. Establishing diplomatic institutions such as an Interplanetary Trade Organization, an Intergalactic Rights Agreement, and a Galactic Court of Justice will allow humanity to navigate the complexities of interstellar relations while promoting peaceful coexistence and mutual respect.[64]

CONCLUSION

As humanity moves toward becoming an interplanetary civilization, the legal, ethical, and diplomatic frameworks governing extraterrestrial rights, planetary sovereignty, and interstellar relations must evolve to meet new challenges and opportunities. The current international space law system, while foundational, is inadequate for addressing emerging complexities such as extraterrestrial life, space colonization, resource exploitation, and diplomatic engagement with non-human civilizations. To ensure that space exploration is guided by principles of justice, sustainability, and ethical responsibility, this paper has outlined three key proposals. The recognition of legal personhood for extraterrestrial life whether microbial, intelligent, or environmental would establish moral and legal protections against exploitation and destruction. Drawing from terrestrial precedents in environmental personhood, celestial bodies such as Mars, Europa, and other potentially life-bearing planets could be granted legal status to prevent contamination, unsustainable mining, and ecological degradation. Expanding the Space Liability Convention to include protections for extraterrestrial ecosystems would be a crucial step in ensuring that space remains a shared and responsibly managed environment.[65] As human settlements expand beyond Earth, governance mechanisms must evolve to balance sovereignty, resource management, and ethical planetary stewardship. The Outer Space Treaty’s non-appropriation principle is increasingly challenged by private space enterprises, commercial colonization efforts, and national policies that allow resource extraction.[66] A Multiplanetary Compact, modeled after the Antarctic Treaty, could provide a balanced governance system that prevents territorial disputes while allowing scientific research and controlled resource utilization.[67] Additionally, a United Nations-led Interplanetary Governance Body could oversee space settlements and ensure compliance with international law.[68] With the possibility of first contact with intelligent extraterrestrial civilizations, diplomatic protocols must be established to govern peaceful relations, mutual recognition of rights, and non-interference policies. Inspired by science fiction principles such as the Prime Directive, an Intergalactic Rights Agreement could define the legal status of extraterrestrial beings, ensuring that first contact is ethical, respectful, and non-exploitative. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) could extend its jurisdiction to interstellar disputes, ensuring that conflicts between human space settlements, Earth-based governments, and alien civilizations are mediated through legal mechanisms rather than military escalation.[69] By embracing a proactive and ethical approach to space law, humanity can ensure that our expansion beyond Earth is guided by principles of justice, sustainability, and mutual respect both for extraterrestrial life and for future space societies. Through international cooperation, forward-thinking policies, and legal innovation, we can establish a fair and just multiplanetary future that respects both human and non-human entities in the cosmos.

References

1. Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, 27, 1967, 18 U.S.T. 2410, 610 U.N.T.S. 205 (commonly known as the Outer Space Treaty).
2. Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, Dec. 5, 1979, 1363 U.N.T.S. 3 (commonly known as the Moon Agreement).
3. Knecht, Michael, Interplanetary Law: Bridging Gaps Between Earth and Outer Space, 68 INT’L & COMP. L.Q. 905 (2019).
4. Sullivan, Mark, Interplanetary Diplomacy: A Legal Framework for Space Exploration and Sovereignty, 134 HARV. L. REV. 1302 (2021), https://harvardlawreview.org.

5. Bradford, Andrew, The Economics of Space Exploration: Resource Management and Commercial Trade in Outer Space, 120 COLUM. L. REV. 453 (2020), https://columbialawreview.org.

10. International Institute of Air and Space Law (IIASL), Legal Framework for Space Exploration and Resource Utilization (2020), https://www.iiasl.aero.
11. Star Trek’s Prime Directive and Space Diplomacy: A Theoretical Exploration, 1 SPACE ETHICS & DIPLOMACY 77 (2022).
12. Lemkin, Raphael, Humanity’s First Contact with Extraterrestrial Civilizations: Ethical and Legal Considerations, 38 SPACE POL’Y 15 (2022), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spacepol.2022.02.002.
13. International Court of Justice, Legal Principles in Space: Extending Jurisdiction to Interplanetary Disputes, INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE, https://www.icj-cij.org/en (last visited Mar. 14, 2025).
14. Gonzalez, Frederic, Legal Personhood for Non-Human Entities: A Framework for Extraterrestrial Life, 20 ENV’T L. REV. 401 (2018), https://journals.sagepub.com/home/elr.
15. Duc, Paul, Planetary Defense in Space Governance: International Cooperation and Security, 12 INT’L SEC. STUD. 60 (2021), https://doi.org/10.1017/j.iss.2021.03.
16. Foster, Amanda, The Role of the United Nations in Outer Space: An Emerging Multilateral Approach to Interplanetary Relations, 41 N. L. REV. 56 (2023), https://unlawreview.org.
17. Miller, Caroline, Exploring Extraterrestrial Personhood: Legal Models from Earth to Space, 43 HARV. ENV’T L. REV. 875 (2019), https://harvardelr.com.
18. Thompson, Jonathan, First Contact Protocols: Ethics, Law, and Diplomacy in Space, 35 J. INT’L L. & SPACE POL’Y 45 (2020), https://www.jilsp.com.
19. Hutchinson, Sarah, The Space Liability Convention and Beyond: Expanding Legal Protection for Extraterrestrial Ecosystems, 14 INT’L J. SPACE L. 112 (2022), https://doi.org/10.1093/spacejurisprudence/j5p003.

[1] United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs, The Outer Space Treaty: 50 Years of Space Law (2017), www.unoosa.org.

[2] Joanne Irene Gabrynowicz, The Rule of Law in Space: International and Domestic Space Law and Policy, 36 Harv. Int’l L.J. 1 (1995).

[3] Fabio Tronchetti, The Exploitation of Natural Resources of the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies: A Proposal for a Legal Regime (Martinus Nijhoff Publ’rs 2009).

[4] Frans G. von der Dunk, International Space Law, in Handbook of Space Law 31, 31–57 (Edward Elgar Publ’g 2015).

[5] Leslie I. Tennen, Towards a New Regime for Exploitation of Outer Space Mineral Resources, 88 Neb. L. Rev. 4 (2010).

[6] U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act, Pub. L. No. 114-90, 129 Stat. 704 (2015).

[7] Mark J. Sundahl, The Duty to Seek United Nations Authorization before Engaging in Extraterrestrial Resource Extraction, 37 Hous. J. Int’l L. (2015).

[8] Christopher D. Stone, Should Trees Have Standing? Toward Legal Rights for Natural Objects, 45 S. Cal. L. Rev. (1972).

[9] Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, adopted by G.A. Res. 2222 (XXI), U.N. Doc. A/RES/2222 (Dec. 19, 1966), entered into force Oct. 10, 1967.

[10] United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, Legal Subcommittee Report on International Mechanisms for Space Governance (2019), www.unoosa.org.

[11] Jill Stuart, Legal Aspects of Space Settlement and Sovereignty, 37 Space Pol’y 85, 85–92 (2016).

[12] Michael J. Listner, The Legal and Policy Implications of Lunar Colonization, Int’l Inst. Space L. Proc. (2019).

[13] Seth Baum, First Contact and the Ethics of Interstellar Engagement, 14 J. Cosmology (2019).

[14] Frank G. White, Space Ethics and the Case for a Universal Declaration of Rights in Space, 62 Advances in Space Res. 6 (2018).

[15] Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, Jan. 27, 1967, 18 U.S.T. 2410, 610 U.N.T.S. 205 (Outer Space Treaty).

[16] NASA, The Artemis Program: Human Exploration of the Moon and Beyond (2021).

[17] U.N. Off. for Outer Space Affs., International Space Law Overview (2020).

[18] Christopher D. Stone, Should Trees Have Standing? (Oxford Univ. Press 2010).

[19] Eur. Space Agency, Exoplanets and the Search for Life (2022).

[20] Int’l Inst. of Space L., Legal Framework for Extraterrestrial Life (2021).

[21] Constitución de la República del Ecuador art. 71 (2008) (Ecuador) (Rights of Nature).

[22] Mohd. Salim v. State of Uttarakhand, (2017) 11 S.C.C. 261 (India).

[23] Te Awa Tupua (Whanganui River Claims Settlement) Act 2017 (N.Z.).

[24] Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects, Mar. 29, 1972, 24 U.S.T. 2389,

[25] U.N. Off. for Outer Space Affs., The Role of International Law in Space Governance (2019).

[26] Fabio Tronchetti, The Exploitation of Natural Resources of the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (Springer 2009).

[27] Outer Space Treaty, art. II.

[28] U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act, Pub. L. No. 114-90, 129 Stat. 704 (2015).

[29] Star Trek: The Next Generation: Prime Directive (CBS television broadcast Mar. 21, 1988).

[30] Comm. on Space Rsch., Planetary Protection Policy (2020).

[31] Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion, 2004 I.C.J. Rep. 136 (July 9).

[32] Carl Sagan, The Cosmic Connection: An Extraterrestrial Perspective (1973).

[33] Outer Space Treaty, art. II, Jan. 27, 1967, 18 U.S.T. 2410, 610 U.N.T.S. 205.

[34] United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs (UNOOSA), Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (1967).

[35] U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act, Pub. L. No. 114-90, 129 Stat. 704 (2015).

[36] Moon Agreement, art. 11, Dec. 18, 1979, 1363 U.N.T.S. 3.

[37] Luxembourg Space Resources Law, Loi du 20 juillet 2017 sur l’exploration et l’utilisation des ressources de l’espace, 2017 (Lux.).

[38] P.J. Blount & Christian J. Robison, Colonization, Space Resources, and Property Rights: Addressing the Potential Sources of Conflict, 41 J. Space L. 1 (2017).

[39] China National Space Administration (CNSA), China’s Space Policy: Governance and Expansion (2021).

[40] Antarctic Treaty, art. IV, Dec. 1, 1959, 12 U.S.T. 794, 402 U.N.T.S. 71.

[41] Scott Shackelford, Governing the Final Frontier: Exploring the Outer Space Treaty and Its Relevance to Modern Space Governance, 61 Harv. Int’l L.J. 1 (2020).

[42] G.A. Res. 47/68, Principles Relevant to the Use of Nuclear Power Sources in Outer Space (Dec. 14, 1992).

[43] Timothy G. Nelson, Sovereignty and Space Exploration: New Legal Challenges for a Multiplanetary Future,

[44] International Institute of Space Law (IISL), Legal Implications of Private Space Activities Under the Outer Space Treaty (2022).

[45] Joanne Irene Gabrynowicz, The Legal Framework for Human Space Exploration: The Role of International and National Law, 114 Am. J. Int’l L. 1 (2020).

[46] Treaty of Lisbon, art. 5(3), Dec. 13, 2007, 2007 O.J. (C 306) 1.

[47] Elisabeth Backimp, Space Mining and the Legal Status of Celestial Resources, 9 Eur. J. Space L. 1 (2019).

[48] Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (Outer Space Treaty), U.N. GAOR, 21st Sess., U.N. Doc. A/RES/2222

(XXI) (Dec. 19, 1966), entered into force Oct. 10, 1967.

[49] Carl Q. Christol, The Modern International Law of Outer Space 124–30 (Pergamon Press 1982).

[50] Frans G. von der Dunk, Handbook of Space Law 278–90 (Edward Elgar Publishing 2015).

[51] Joanne Gabrynowicz, Space Law: Its Cold War Origins and Challenges in the Era of Globalization, 47 Harv. Int’l L.J. 94, 94–120 (2006).

[52] Stephan Hobe, The Current Status of the International Space Law and Its Relevance to Space Activities, 37 J. Space L. 229, 229–45 (2011).

[53] Fabio Tronchetti, The Exploitation of Natural Resources of the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies: A Proposal for a Legal Regime 67–89 (Martinus Nijhoff 2009).

[54] U.N. Office for Outer Space Affairs (UNOOSA), Legal Subcommittee Report on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, U.N. Doc. A/AC.105/1203 (2020).

[55] NASA, Near-Earth Object Preparedness Strategy and Action Plan, U.S. Off. of Sci. & Tech. Pol’y (June 2018).

[56] U.N. Office for Outer Space Affairs (UNOOSA), Planetary Protection and Space Governance, U.N. Doc. A/AC.105/1170 (2018).

[57] Michael Shermer, Why ET Will Not Phone Home, 304 Sci. Am. 85, 85–92 (2011).

[58] Gene Roddenberry, Star Trek: The Prime Directive and Its Real-World Implications (Smithsonian Inst. Press 1985).

[59] U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, G.A. Res. 61/295, U.N. Doc. A/RES/61/295 (Sept. 13, 2007).

[60] Ecuador’s Constitution of 2008, art. 71.

[61] Convention on Biological Diversity, opened for signature June 5, 1992, 1760 U.N.T.S. 79.

[62] Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, arts. 5–8, July 17, 1998, 2187 U.N.T.S. 90.

[63] Michael Byers, Who Owns the Moon? Space Law and Governance in a New Era of Exploration 211–30 (Cambridge Univ. Press 2023).

[64] Int’l Court of Justice, Advisory Opinion on the Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, 2004 ICJ Rep. 136.

[65] United Nations, Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, opened for signature Jan. 27, 1967, 610 U.N.T.S. 205.

[66] Michael Byers, Who Owns the Moon? Space Law and Governance in a New Era of Exploration 211–30 (Cambridge Univ. Press 2023).

[67] Frans G. von der Dunk, Handbook of Space Law 278–90 (Edward Elgar Publishing 2015).

[68] International Court of Justice, Advisory Opinion on the Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, 2004 ICJ Rep. 136.

[69] Ecuador’s Constitution of 2008, art. 71.