Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
To Touch And Concern The United States With Sufficient Force: How American Due Process And Choice Of Law Cases Inform The Reach Of The Alien Tort Statute After Kiobel, Karima Tawfik
Michigan Journal of International Law
This Note explores the post-Kiobel ATS cases and argues that the Fourth Circuit’s approach to considering claims that manifest a close connection to the United States as potentially entitling the plaintiff to relief under the ATS is preferable to approaches that categorically bar claims when the alleged conduct has occurred abroad. Part I describes the Kiobel decision in more depth and the subsequent ATS case law to outline the contours of recent circuit cases. Part II demonstrates how domestic personal jurisdiction and choice of law principles weigh in favor of a more expansive reading of the ATS, as adopted …
Sanchez-Llamas V. Oregon And Article 36 Of The Vienna Convention On Consular Relations: The Supreme Court, The Right To Consul, And Remediation, Mark J. Kadish, Charles C. Olson
Sanchez-Llamas V. Oregon And Article 36 Of The Vienna Convention On Consular Relations: The Supreme Court, The Right To Consul, And Remediation, Mark J. Kadish, Charles C. Olson
Michigan Journal of International Law
This Article analyzes the Sanchez-Llamas decision and attempts to ascertain its impact on future Article 36 litigation.
Judicial Dialogue For Legal Multiculturalism, Charles H. Koch Jr.
Judicial Dialogue For Legal Multiculturalism, Charles H. Koch Jr.
Michigan Journal of International Law
This Article asserts that judicial exchange rather than dominance has inherent advantages as a technique for evolving a global legal culture. For insight into the global task, the Article looks first at an internecine struggle within the continental system. For further background, it describes how the U.S. Supreme Court has accommodated deviations from the basic legal model in U.S. administrative law as well as other internal U.S. legal systems. The supranational tribunals in the European setting and U.S. Supreme Court have shown the capacity to engage in dialogues over diverse legal philosophies. These experiences demonstrate the advantages of a mix …
The Passive Virtues And The World Court: Pro-Dialogic Abstentation By The International Court Of Justice, Antonio F. Perez
The Passive Virtues And The World Court: Pro-Dialogic Abstentation By The International Court Of Justice, Antonio F. Perez
Michigan Journal of International Law
This article will describe how the World Court has abstained in a way that not only expresses its commitment to principled government but also implements a coordinate, participation-inducing agenda. The article argues that the most recent jurisprudence of the ICJ manifests an acceleration of this tendency in response not only to the need to conserve judicial resources in light of the increased use of the Court by States, but also, and more significantly, to the enhanced law-making activity of the political organs of the U.N.
The New East European Constitutional Courts, Herman Schwartz
The New East European Constitutional Courts, Herman Schwartz
Michigan Journal of International Law
This article will describe some aspects of the different tribunals in Russia, Hungary, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria, and Romania, and will compare them with each other and with the U.S. Supreme Court. The first part will begin by explaining a few basic differences between the American and Continental systems of judicial review, and will then describe the functions of the new East European constitutional courts. The second part will use the decisions of the new Russian Constitutional Court to illustrate the new courts' exercise of authority, and will summarize the recent activities of a few other new constitutional courts.
The Right To Bail In United States Extradition Proceedings, Carl A. Valenstein
The Right To Bail In United States Extradition Proceedings, Carl A. Valenstein
Michigan Journal of International Law
This note examines the judicial rationale for denying bail in extradition proceedings except in special circumstances. The author maintains that the courts apply the special circumstances rule inconsistently. Moreover, a better balance should be struck between the interests of the accused and the interests of the United States Government. This can be accomplished by granting the accused in an extradition proceeding the same right to bail before a final order granting extradition as exists under the federal bail statute.