Privatization of functions that were traditionally considered sovereign has reached new heights. International lawyers have responded mostly by seeking to limit some of the consequences of that phenomenon, by, for example, ensuring accountability of states for outsourcing. International law has sometimes appeared agnostic, however, about the very legality of privatization. This Article explores a more radical take, namely the possibility that certain state functions could be seen as “inherently sovereign” under international law. International law can be understood this way, the Article argues, despite its general deferral to sovereignty (including the sovereignty to outsource), the fact that historically all kinds of functions that we have come to associate with the state have been exercised privately, and international law's own role in legitimizing privatization in our era.

中文翻译：

---

国际法中是否存在“固有的主权功能”？

传统上被视为主权的职能私有化已达到新的高度。国际律师的回应主要是试图限制这种现象的一些后果，例如，确保各国对外包负责。然而，国际法有时似乎不知道私有化的合法性。本文探讨了一个更激进的观点，即某些国家职能可以被视为国际法下的“固有主权”的可能性。文章认为，国际法可以这样理解，尽管它普遍推迟到主权（包括外包主权），事实上，历史上我们与国家相关的各种职能都是私下行使的，而且国际法律'