Adverse Interests And Article Iii, 2017 University of Virginia School of Law
Adverse Interests And Article Iii, Ann Woolhandler
Northwestern University Law Review
In an important article in the Yale Law Journal, James Pfander and Daniel Birk claim that adverseness is not required by Article III for cases arising under federal law. This Article takes the position that Pfander and Birk have not made the case for reconsidering adversity requirements for Article III cases. Adverseness may be present when there is adversity of legal interests, even when adverse argument is not present. From this perspective, a number of Pfander and Birk’s examples of non-contentious jurisdiction manifested adverseness. In rem-type proceedings such as bankruptcy and prize cases required the determination of adverse interests ...
Brief Amici Curiae On Behalf Of International And Constitutional Law Experts In Support Of Petition For Certiorari, Al Bahlul V. United States , 840 F.3d 757 (D.C. Cir. 2016) (En Banc), 2017 Boston University School of Law
Brief Amici Curiae On Behalf Of International And Constitutional Law Experts In Support Of Petition For Certiorari, Al Bahlul V. United States , 840 F.3d 757 (D.C. Cir. 2016) (En Banc), Robert D. Sloane, Foley Hoag Llp
Amici curiae, legal experts in international and constitutional law, believe that a majority of the en banc panel in Bahlul v. United States, 840 F.3d 757 (D.C. Cir. 2016) (en banc), mistakenly affirmed Ali Hamza Ahmad Suliman al Bahlul’s conviction by a military commission for a non-international war crime. The main concurring opinion in that case misconceived how international law defines the jurisdiction of law-of-war military commissions. As amici argue below, it is the Constitution—not international law—that limits the jurisdiction of lawof-war military commissions.
Klabacka V. Nelson, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 24 (May 25, 2017), 2017 University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law
Klabacka V. Nelson, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 24 (May 25, 2017), Christopher Kelly
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that (1) family courts have subject matter jurisdiction in divorce proceedings that involve issues otherwise outside the scope of family courts, (2) parol evidence may not be considered to determine party intent to form separate property agreements and self-settled spendthrift trusts where the written agreements are valid and unambiguous, (3) a court order equalizing assets between different spendthrift trusts is improper because the NRS protects against court orders that move assets from trusts and against moves that do not benefit trust beneficiaries, (4) spendthrift trusts may not be reached for payment of personal obligations not known at ...
“Indians, In A Jurisdictional Sense”: Tribal Citizenship And Other Forms Of Non-Indian Consent To Tribal Criminal Jurisdiction, 2017 Seattle University School of Law
“Indians, In A Jurisdictional Sense”: Tribal Citizenship And Other Forms Of Non-Indian Consent To Tribal Criminal Jurisdiction, Paul Spruhan
American Indian Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Democracy In Brazil: The Evolving Role Of The Country’S Supreme Court, 2017 Brazilian Supreme Court
Democracy In Brazil: The Evolving Role Of The Country’S Supreme Court, Dias Toffoli
Boston College International and Comparative Law Review
The objective of this paper is to analyze the functions of the Brazilian Supreme Court and the need to attribute to a single specific entity the roles of guardian of the constitution, court of the federation, and moderator of political and social conflicts. It is also important to stress the relevance of the Brazilian Supreme Court as a criminal court, overseeing inquiries and criminal suits involving federal authorities entitled to the prerogative of privileged jurisdiction.
Dueling Grants: Reimagining Cafa’S Jurisdictional Provisions, 2017 Texas A&M University School of Law
Dueling Grants: Reimagining Cafa’S Jurisdictional Provisions, Tanya Pierce
Georgia State University Law Review
More than a decade after Congress passed the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA), courts continue to disagree as to its application and meaning in a variety of situations, many of which have wide-ranging effects. This article considers a fundamental issue that arises after a certification decision is reached: whether a court’s subject matter jurisdiction under CAFA depends on a class being certified. Specifically, the article considers what happens when a federal court’s subject matter jurisdiction derives solely from CAFA’s minimal diversity jurisdiction provision and a request for class certification under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure ...
Rwu First Amendment Blog: Andrew Horwitz's Blog: First Amendment Protects The Right To Give And To Receive 05-23-2017, 2017 Roger Williams University School of Law
Rwu First Amendment Blog: Andrew Horwitz's Blog: First Amendment Protects The Right To Give And To Receive 05-23-2017, Andrew Horwitz
Law School Blogs
No abstract provided.
Have Prenup, Will Travel: Why England’S Law On Marital Agreements Has Attracted Forum Shoppers And How The Courts Can Fight Back, Karina Vanhouten
Brooklyn Journal of International Law
This Note examines the English judiciary’s reluctance to fully accept marital agreements, and the disruptive effect this has in the global legal arena. In our increasingly international world, the fundamental events of family life—marriage, divorce, and death—often no longer occur in the same jurisdiction. In recent years, prospective divorcées from around the globe have flocked to England to take advantage of the country’s matrimonial law, which generally favors the party seeking to invalidate or minimize a marital agreement. This forum-shopping phenomenon is problematic because English courts regularly disregard foreign marital agreements that would be valid and ...
Retiring Forum Non Conveniens, 2017 Cornell Law School
Retiring Forum Non Conveniens, Maggie Gardner
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
When it comes to transnational litigation in the federal courts, it is time to retire the doctrine of forum non conveniens. The doctrine, which allows judges to decline jurisdiction in cases they believe would be better heard in foreign courts, is meant to promote international comity and protect defendant fairness. But it is not well-designed for the former purpose, and given recent developments at the Supreme Court, it is dangerously redundant when it comes to the latter. This Article seeks to demythologize forum non conveniens, to question its continuing relevance, and to encourage the courts and Congress to narrow its ...
Unsafe Harbor: The European Union's Demand For Heightened Data Privacy Standards In Schrems V. Irish Data Protection Commissioner, Christina Lam
Boston College International and Comparative Law Review
In 1995, the European Union adopted the Data Protection Directive to govern the processing, use, and exchange of personal data. The United States refused to enact similar legislation, consequently jeopardizing ongoing and future data transfers with the European Union. To prevent economic catastrophe, the United States negotiated with the European Union to reach the Safe Harbor Agreement and, on July 26, 2000, the European Commission formally recognized the agreement as compliant with the Data Protection Directive in its Safe Harbor Decision. In 2013, U.S. data protection standards were once again placed under the microscope when Edward Snowden leaked information ...
Is It Safe To Speak Up Now? Evaluating The Expansion Of Whistleblower Protection Act Jurisdiction, 2017 Pepperdine University
Is It Safe To Speak Up Now? Evaluating The Expansion Of Whistleblower Protection Act Jurisdiction, Gil Landau
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
Whistleblowers have uncovered billions of dollars of fraud and severe national security threats. Nonetheless, for many years, federal employee whistleblowers faced retaliation and termination. Congress passed the Whistleblower Protection Act (WPA) in an attempt to protect federal employee whistleblowers. But, the exclusive court for WPA appeals, the Federal Circuit, ignored Congressional intent and limited the WPA’s protections. In 2013, Congress responded by creating a five year experiment, known as “all circuit review,” to determine if WPA claims should also be appealable to the regional circuits. Over the past three years, all circuit review has led to modest changes in ...
Domicile Dismantled, 2017 University of Virginia
Domicile Dismantled, Kerry Abrams, Kathryn Barber
Indiana Law Journal
Part I of this Article discusses the legal and factual background of Mas v. Perry. This narrative reveals how the case reflects both the changes in American society that were beginning to occur at that time and the struggle of the concept of domicile to keep pace with those changes. Part II traces the development of the fundamental shift in gender roles that began several years before Mas was decided. This section argues that the growing number of women attending college, embarking upon careers, and forming two-career marriages increased the difficulty of measuring domicile, while undermining the efficacy of a ...
Troubled Waters Between U.S. And European Antitrust, 2017 University of Florida Levin College of Law
Troubled Waters Between U.S. And European Antitrust, D. Daniel Sokol
Michigan Law Review
Review of The Atlantic Divide in Antitrust: An Examination of US and EU Competition Policy by Daniel J. Gifford and Robert T. Kudrle.
Boundary Dispute: The Presumption Against Extraterritoriality As Judicial Nondelegation, 2017 Brigham Young University Law School
Boundary Dispute: The Presumption Against Extraterritoriality As Judicial Nondelegation, Luke Bell
BYU Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Jurisdiction Canon, 2017 William & Mary Law School
The Jurisdiction Canon, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
This Article concerns the interpretation of jurisdictional statutes. The fundamental postulate of the law of the federal courts is that the federal courts are courts of limited subject-matter jurisdiction. That principle is reinforced by a canon of statutory interpretation according to which statutes conferring federal subject-matter jurisdiction are to be construed narrowly, with ambiguities resolved against the availability of federal jurisdiction. This interpretive canon is over a century old and has been recited in thousands of federal cases, but its future has become uncertain. The Supreme Court recently stated that the canon does not apply to many of today’s ...
Preclusion And Criminal Judgment, 2017 University of Maryland School of Law
Preclusion And Criminal Judgment, Lee Kovarsky
Notre Dame Law Review
The defining question in modern habeas corpus law involves the finality
of a state conviction: What preclusive effect does (and should) a criminal
judgment have? Res judicata and collateral estoppel —the famous preclusion
rules for civil judgments—accommodate basic legal interests in fairness,
certitude, and sovereignty. Legal institutions carefully calibrate the preclusive
effect of civil judgments because judicial resources are scarce, because
the reliability and legitimacy of prior process can vary, and because courts
wield the authority of a repeat-playing sovereign that will find its own civil
judgments attacked in foreign litigation. In stark contrast to the legal sophistication
The Exceptional Role Of Courts In The Constitutional Order, 2017 Trinity College, Oxford
The Exceptional Role Of Courts In The Constitutional Order, N.W. Barber, Adrian Vermeule
Notre Dame Law Review
This Article looks at a rare part of the judicial role: those exceptional cases when the judge is called upon to pass judgment on the constitution itself. This arises in three groups of cases, roughly speaking. First, in exceptional cases the validity of the constitution and the legal order is thrown into dispute. Second, on some occasions the judge is asked to rule on the transition from one constitutional order to another. Third, there are some cases in which the health of the constitutional order requires the judge to act not merely beyond the law, as it were, but actually ...
The Unsung Virtues Of Global Forum Shopping, 2017 Temple University Beasley School of Law
The Unsung Virtues Of Global Forum Shopping, Pamela K. Bookman
Notre Dame Law Review
Forum shopping gets a bad name. This is even more true in the context of transnational litigation. The term is associated with unprincipled gamesmanship and undeserved victories. Courts therefore often seek to thwart the practice. But in recent years, exaggerated perceptions of the “evils” of forum shopping among courts in different countries have led U.S. courts to impose high barriers to global forum shopping. These extreme measures prevent global forum shopping from serving three unappreciated functions: protecting access to justice, promoting private regulatory enforcement, and fostering legal reform.
This Article challenges common perceptions about global forum shopping that have ...
"A Radical Proposal": The Multidistrict Litigation Act Of 1968, 2017 Berkeley Law
"A Radical Proposal": The Multidistrict Litigation Act Of 1968, Andrew D. Bradt
Andrew D. Bradt
The Cure Is Worse: First Circuit Circumvents False Claims Act's First-To-File Rule In United States Ex Rel. Gadbois V. Pharmerica Corp., Daniel Sorger
Boston College Law Review
In 2015, in United States ex rel. Gadbois v. PharMerica Corp., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit held that a qui tam relator could use supplementation to cure a jurisdictional first-to-file defect in a False Claims Act (“FCA”) action. In contrast, in 2010, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in United States ex rel. Chovanec v. Apria Healthcare Group, Inc. held that relators barred by first-to-file must face dismissal without prejudice and then refile if they are to proceed. Separately, in 2015, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C ...