Digital Commons Network^™

Habeas Corpus, Constructive Custody And The Future Of Federal Jurisdiction After Munaf, Karen Shafrir

University of Miami International and Comparative Law Review

In 2004-05, two American Citizens, Shaqir Omar and Mohamed Munaf were separately arrested in Iraq and placed in the Camp Cropper Military Facility, pending adjudication. Both prisoners filed writs of habeas corpus in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The primary issue that the lower courts grappled with was whether or not the courts had jurisdiction to hear the petitions. After various appeals, the United States Supreme Court concluded that the federal courts did have jurisdiction to entertain the habeas petitions but that the petitions would fail on the merits. This paper argues that the standard …

False Sanctuary: The Australian Antarctic Whale Sanctuary And Long-Term Stability In Antarctica, Donald K. Anton

Cornell Law School Berger International Speaker Papers

The recent assertion of maritime adjudicative jurisdiction by Australian courts over a Japanese whaling company for acts contrary to Australian law in the Antarctic Southern Ocean is alarming. Private litigation, based on an internationally disputed claim to sovereignty over Antarctic territory and a further contested claim to an EEZ appurtenant to that territory, ought not to serve as a proxy for cooperative (and hopefully effective) international management of the Antarctic environment. The big danger is that if other states follow Australia's lead in claiming sovereign rights and exercising attendant jurisdiction the chances of natural resource over-exploitation and environmental harm in …

Extraterritoriality In U.S. Patent Law, Timothy R. Holbrook

William & Mary Law Review

Globalization has eroded traditional territorial limits on intellectual property laws. Although this pressure was first seen in trademark and copyright law, recent court decisions have demonstrated that the territorial lines of U.S. patents are also under assault. Indeed, the Supreme Court recently considered extraterritoriality in U.S. patent law in its 2007 decision in Microsoft Corp. v. AT&T Corp., discussed thoroughly in this Article. Courts and commentators have offered two primary approaches to deal with the issue of the extraterritorial reach of U.S. patents. First, many courts, including the Supreme Court, continue to adhere to a strict view of a patent's …

Prosecuting Aggression, Noah Weisbord

Faculty Publications

The Assembly of States Parties to the International Criminal Court will soon have its first opportunity to revise the Rome Statute and activate the latent crime of aggression, which awaits a definition of its elements and conditions for the exercise of jurisdiction. The working group charged with drafting a provision is scheduled to complete its task by 2008 or 2009, one year before the International Criminal Court’s first review conference.

Beginning with a history of the crime meant to put the current negotiations in the context of past initiatives, this article sets out the status of the negotiations and begins …

Beyond The Article I Horizon: Congress’S Enumerated Powers And Universal Jurisdiction Over Drug Crimes, Eugene Kontorovich

Faculty Working Papers

This paper explores the Article I limits faced by Congress in exercising universal jurisdiction (UJ) – that is, regulating extraterritorial conduct by foreigners with no affect on or connection the U.S. While UJ is becoming increasingly popular in Europe for the punishment of human rights offenses, Congress's primary use of UJ today is under the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act. This obscure law allows the U.S. to punish for violating U.S. drug laws foreign defendants on foreign vessels in international waters. The MDLEA's UJ provisions raise fundamental questions about the source and extent of Congress's constitutional power to regulate purely …

Extraterritorial Jurisdiction In Civil, Commercial, And Investment Matters, Anibal Sabater

ILSA Journal of International & Comparative Law

Extraterritorial jurisdiction can be defined as a government's ability to adjudicate disputes involving individuals who are located and/or events that have taken place in anotherjurisdiction, including acts and omissions of foreign officials.

Preferring Defects: The Jurisdiction Of Military Commissions, Madeline Morris, Allison Hester-Haddad

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Domestic Influence Of International Criminal Tribunals: The International Criminal Tribunal For The Former Yugoslavia And The Creation Of The State Court Of Bosnia & Herzegovina, William W. Burke-White

All Faculty Scholarship

International criminal tribunals are often criticized for having minimal influence on the states over which they exercise jurisdiction. This article argues that the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia has had a far more positive impact on domestic governance in Bosnia & Herzegovina than previously assumed by both the academic and policy communities. The article develops a theoretical model to explain the impact of international criminal tribunals on domestic governance and tests that model against the ICTY¹s influence in Bosnia. More specifically, the article advances the claim that the nature of the tribunal¹s jurisdictional relationship with domestic judicial institutions …

International Law's Mixed Heritage: A Common/Civil Law Jurisdiction, Colin B. Picker

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

This Article provides the first application of the emerging mixed jurisdiction jurisprudence to a comparative analysis of international law. Such a comparative law analysis is important today as the growth and increasing vitality of international juridical, administrative and legislative institutions is placing demands on international law not previously experienced. International law is unsure where to look for help in coping with these new stresses. In significant part this isolation can be attributed to a general view among international law scholars that international law is sui generis, and hence there is little to be gained from national legal systems. This Article …

United States Opposition To The 1998 Rome Statute Establishing An International Criminal Court: Is The Court's Jurisdiction Truly Complementary To National Criminal Jurisdictions?, Jimmy Gurule

Journal Articles

Although the United States supports the creation of a permanent International Criminal Court (ICC), it opposes such a court as set forth in the 1998 Rome Statute because it leaves open the potential for United States military personnel and government officials to be prosecuted for unintended loss of civilian life. Can the United States formulate a legal argument to support its view that inadvertent civilian casualties should not be considered a war crime within the jurisdiction of the ICC? The article argues that it can because the ICC’s jurisdiction under the Rome Statute is not complementary to national prosecutions held …