Does Anyone Own the Moon?

iStock
iStock

For decades, science fiction authors have imagined the Moon as one of humanity’s great land conquests, home to space colonies, space prisons, space labs, and space apartments. Jules Verne wrote that we would arrive there by firing astronauts out of a cannon. Robert Heinlein conceived of a moon base that resists governance from Earth and revolts.

With several countries—including Japan, India, and China—making plans for a crewed Moon mission for the first time since the United States last touched down in 1972, the question of who has a claim to the Moon and its resources is less a speculative fiction subject and more one for lawyers. Specifically, space lawyers.

In a post for Real Clear Science, Frans von der Dunk, an attorney and professor of space law (honestly) at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln's College of Law, examined the question of Moon ownership. Two years before Americans landed on the lunar surface for the first time in 1969, countries including the U.S. and the Soviet Union prepared and committed to the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, which solidified the moon as a “global commons.” It could belong to no single nation, and its secrets, resources, and other untapped potential would be in the service of the greater good. As a goodwill effort, the U.S. even shared soil and rock samples with Russia in spite of the Cold War making such scientific fraternization unlikely.

While no nation can assert land rights on the Moon, the question of who owns resources cultivated from both the Moon and asteroids—which are also materially part of the treaty—is not so clear. If a country is able to mine minerals and other space resources, are they able to claim possession, or must they be shared with the rest of the world?

Von der Dunk isn’t quite sure, which is why “space law” and “space lawyer,” though they sound comical, are probably going to be very real and very needed in the near future. It might be that mining asteroids or the Moon becomes akin to commercial fishing: So long as you’re licensed, you can keep what you catch. But some countries, like Russia, believe anything extracted from space should have communal benefits to humanity as a whole.

One thing is certain: Neil Armstrong planting a U.S. flag on the Moon, while evocative, probably won’t mean a whole lot in space court.

Have you got a Big Question you'd like us to answer? If so, let us know by emailing us at bigquestions@mentalfloss.com.

Turn Your LEGO Bricks Into a Drone With the Flybrix Drone Kit

Flyxbrix/FatBrain
Flyxbrix/FatBrain

Now more than ever, it’s important to have a good hobby. Of course, a lot of people—maybe even you—have been obsessed with learning TikTok dances and baking sourdough bread for the last few months, but those hobbies can wear out their welcome pretty fast. So if you or someone you love is looking for something that’s a little more intellectually stimulating, you need to check out the Flybrix LEGO drone kit from Fat Brain Toys.

What is a Flybrix LEGO Drone Kit?

The Flybrix drone kit lets you build your own drones out of LEGO bricks and fly them around your house using your smartphone as a remote control (via Bluetooth). The kit itself comes with absolutely everything you need to start flying almost immediately, including a bag of 56-plus LEGO bricks, a LEGO figure pilot, eight quick-connect motors, eight propellers, a propeller wrench, a pre-programmed Flybrix flight board PCB, a USB data cord, a LiPo battery, and a USB LiPo battery charger. All you’ll have to do is download the Flybrix Configuration Software, the Bluetooth Flight Control App, and access online instructions and tutorials.

Experiment with your own designs.

The Flybrix LEGO drone kit is specifically designed to promote exploration and experimentation. All the components are tough and can totally withstand a few crash landings, so you can build and rebuild your own drones until you come up with the perfect design. Then you can do it all again. Try different motor arrangements, add your own LEGO bricks, experiment with different shapes—this kit is a wannabe engineer’s dream.

For the more advanced STEM learners out there, Flybrix lets you experiment with coding and block-based coding. It uses an arduino-based hackable circuit board, and the Flybrix app has advanced features that let you try your hand at software design.

Who is the Flybrix LEGO Drone Kit for?

Flybrix is a really fun way to introduce a number of core STEM concepts, which makes it ideal for kids—and technically, that’s who it was designed for. But because engineering and coding can get a little complicated, the recommended age for independent experimentation is 13 and up. However, kids younger than 13 can certainly work on Flybrix drones with the help of their parents. In fact, it actually makes a fantastic family hobby.

Ready to start building your own LEGO drones? Click here to order your Flybrix kit today for $198.

At Mental Floss, we only write about the products we love and want to share with our readers, so all products are chosen independently by our editors. Mental Floss has affiliate relationships with certain retailers and may receive a percentage of any sale made from the links on this page. Prices and availability are accurate as of the time of publication.

What Is the Insurrection Act?

The Insurrection Act gives the president the authority to address domestic disturbances using the military.
The Insurrection Act gives the president the authority to address domestic disturbances using the military.
Tero Vesalainen/iStock via Getty Images

The use of military forces to address volatile situations normally under the purview of law enforcement within the United States is a very rare occurrence, and for good reason. Troops are legally forbidden to be involved in domestic law enforcement affairs without prior congressional authorization.

One loophole does exist. It’s the Insurrection Act, and it empowers the president to dispatch soldiers to combat an insurrection, civil disturbance, natural disaster, or terrorist attack on American soil. But actually invoking the Insurrection Act is no simple matter.

The Act was introduced in 1807 and gives the president the authority to direct American troops to intervene in state-level civil unrest in the event local authorities are unable to control the disturbance. (It was amended in 2006 following Hurricane Katrina to include disasters and terrorism.) It’s used sparingly, particularly as modern police forces have become more militarized. The last time the Act was invoked was in 1992, when riots following the acquittal of four police officers tried in the beating of Rodney King consumed Los Angeles.

At the time, the California governor requested military forces—and normally, the president would activate federal troops at the behest of a governor or state legislature. According to the Los Angeles Times, one exception for dispatching soldiers without state approval is an indication that states are violating civil rights, as was the case for several U.S. presidents (Dwight Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, and Lyndon B. Johnson) who used military forces to back desegregation in Southern states. Alternately, the president would have to believe such events are interfering with a state’s ability to enforce their laws.

Put simply: Military forces are typically sent at the request of the state, but a request isn’t necessary if the president believes troops are needed to restore order.

When states believe local police are being overwhelmed, their preference is to use the National Guard, which is authorized to act as law enforcement on domestic soil.

If the Act is used, the president would first have to issue a proclamation ordering those involved in any disturbance to disperse. If that fails, the president would issue an executive order to activate the military. States would then likely argue against the intrusion of such forces. It is not clear, however, that they would have the legal justification to prevent such an action if the president calls for it.

[h/t Los Angeles Times]