Abstract
In 2017, the United States announced its plan to return human astronauts to the Moon for the first time in nearly 50 years for the purposes of “long-term exploration and utilization.” Christened the Artemis Program in 2020, its stated goal is the establishment of a permanent lunar settlement that could serve as a gateway for human exploration deeper into the solar system. There is a problem, however. It might not be legal. Existing international law forbids space-faring nations from “appropriating” celestial bodies by claim of sovereignty or by means of use or occupation. Does the American establishment of a permanent lunar settlement, surrounded by a “safety zone,” violate this essential precept of space law? NASA and its Artemis partner nations say the plans comply with, and further the purposes of, space law. As part of the program, NASA has promulgated the Artemis Accords, a statement of non-binding legal principles intended to guide the next generation of space exploration. Other major space powers, like China and Russia, contend that the principles laid out in the Artemis Accords violate basic tenets of existing law and represent the first step of an eventual American assertion of sovereignty over the Moon. This paper explores the history and development of space law as it pertains to the principle of non-appropriation and assesses whether Artemis violates this foundational concept. It concludes that the existing regulatory and treaty framework is insufficient to ensure that space exploration and settlement are sustainable.
Presenters
Glynn Torres SpelliscyAdjunct Professor of Law, Ohio Northern University Pettit College of Law, United States
Details
Presentation Type
Paper Presentation in a Themed Session
Theme
2026 Special Focus—Organization in Uncertain Worlds
KEYWORDS
SPACE LAW, ARTEMIS PROGRAM, LUNAR SETTLEMENT, SOVEREIGNTY, INTERNATIONAL LAW
