•  
  •  
 

Abstract

Blockchain technology offers judicial systems a transformative opportunity to enhance the efficiency, security, and transparency of court judgments. This article explores how blockchain-based judgment records could streamline recognition and enforcement procedures. Current methods for authenticating and recognizing judgments depend on slow, manual certification processes and state-specific rules. These approaches create administrative delays, expose systems to fraud, and struggle to keep pace with a digital, global legal landscape. In contrast, a decentralized ledger secured by cryptographic verification would deliver near-instant, tamper- proof records. This could significantly expedite cross-jurisdictional enforcement while upholding due process and reliability. The article reviews recent advancements in blockchain dispute resolution and smart contract enforcement, assessing their alignment with existing legal requirements for due process and authentication. It also examines the implications of autonomous, code-based governance mechanisms that operate outside traditional legal frameworks, stressing the need to preserve judicial oversight and discretion. Although U.S. courts currently lack formal recognition for blockchain-based judgments, international developments signal a global shift towards technologically integrated courts. Examples include China’s national judicial blockchain platform and Dubai’s “smart courts” initiative. In light of these trends, this article argues that courts should recognize cryptographically verified blockchain judgments as authentic and enforceable—on par with conventionally certified judgments—provided they satisfy rigorous technical and legal standards for authentication and due process. Key challenges include privacy risks, interoperability across platforms, and balancing automation with human judicial discretion. Ultimately, integrating blockchain into judicial processes promises a more efficient, transparent, and fraud-resistant legal system. Yet this transition must prioritize procedural fairness and resolve tensions between code-based governance and judicial discretion.

Last Page

351

Download

Share

COinS