Law Commons^™

Gandhi’S Prophecy: Corporate Violence And A Mindful Law For Bhopal, Nehal A. Patel

Nehal A. Patel

AbstractOver thirty years have passed since the Bhopal chemical disaster began,and in that time scholars of corporate social responsibility (CSR) havediscussed and debated several frameworks for improving corporate responseto social and environmental problems. However, CSR discourse rarelydelves into the fundamental architecture of legal thought that oftenbuttresses corporate dominance in the global economy. Moreover, CSRdiscourse does little to challenge the ontological and epistemologicalassumptions that form the foundation for modern economics and the role ofcorporations in the world.I explore methods of transforming CSR by employing the thought ofMohandas Gandhi. I pay particular attention to Gandhi’s critique ofindustrialization and principle of swadeshi (self-sufficiency) …

Rights Without Remedies, Adam Lamparello

Adam Lamparello

The Court should modify the standing doctrine in some contexts for the same reason that, in Shelby County, it invalidated two provisions of the Voting Rights Act: the legislature cannot and will not fix the problem. No legal doctrine should be applied without examining whether elected representatives are capable of remedying specific harms and accounting for the relative unfairness in democratic governance. When the traditional standing requirements are rigidly applied without considering these factors, the Court undermines the separation of powers and prevents sound judicial decision-making. In essence, rigid application of the standing doctrine sends a message to litigants …

"Should I Stay Or Should I Go Now": Analyzing The Federal Prosecution Of Aliens Who Attempt To Stop Living Unlawfully In The United States, Sergio Garcia

Sergio Garcia

Abstract: Title 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) makes it a crime for a previously deported alien to be “found in” the United States without the Attorney General’s consent. There is, however, a conflict among the circuits over whether an illegal alien is “found in” the United States for purposes of § 1326 when he voluntarily travels to a port of entry and is detained there by immigration authorities while he is seeking to leave the country. The circuit courts bordering Mexico and Canada disagree on this issue as a matter of law, as well as a matter of Congressional intent. This …

Conflicted Counselors: Retaliation Protections For Attorney-Whistleblowers In An Inconsistent Regulatory Regime, Jennifer M. Pacella

Jennifer M. Pacella, Esq.

Attorneys, especially in-house counsel, are subject to retaliation by employers in much the same way as traditional whistleblowers, often experiencing retaliation and loss of livelihood for reporting instances of wrongdoing about their clients. Although attorney-whistleblowing undoubtedly invokes ethical concerns, attorneys who “appear and practice” before the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) are required by federal law to act as internal whistleblowers under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (“SOX”) and report evidence of material violations of the law within the organizations that they represent. An attorney’s failure to comply with these obligations will result in SEC-imposed civil penalties and disciplinary action. Recent federal …

The Eu's Human Rights Obligations Towards Distant Strangers, Aravind Ganesh

Aravind Ganesh

The EU has perfect human rights obligations towards distant strangers. My argument has two limbs: Firstly, in numerous policy areas, the EU asserts jurisdiction via ‘territorial extension’, which combines territorially limited enforcement jurisdiction with a claim of geographically unbounded prescriptive jurisdiction. Doctrinally, this strongly resembles the Lotus principle, and viewed analytically, amounts to a claim not just of power but of political authority. Thus, the EU creates not just factual effects, but legal effects abroad. Secondly, assertions of political authority, even if only de facto, give rise to perfect human rights obligations. I illustrate this by reference to the Strasbourg …

A Call For An Overhaul Of The U.S. Federal Court System, Huhnkie Lee

Huhnkie Lee

No abstract provided.

Why Chief Justice Roy Moore And The Alabama Supreme Court Just Made The Best Case For Same-Sex Marriage, Adam Lamparello

Adam Lamparello

The Alabama Court of the Judiciary should remove Roy Moore from the Supreme Court of Alabama for a second and final time. Over ten years after being ousted from the Alabama Supreme Court, Chief Justice Moore is embroiled in yet another controversy that involves disregarding the federal courts and creating chaos in the legal system. In fact, Moore recently stated that he would ignore the Supremacy Clause and not respect a U.S. Supreme Court decision invalidating same-sex marriage bans. That statement brings back memories of Governor Wallace’s infamous stand at the schoolhouse door. At least Wallace had a change of …

The Future Of Sex Offense Courts: How Expanding Specialized Sex Offense Courts Can Help Reduce Recidivism And Improve Victim Reporting, Catharine Richmond, Melissa Richmond

Catharine Richmond

Specialty sex offense courts are a nascent judicial innovation that seek to improve general public safety through reducing recidivism. Decreased recidivism results from swifter, personalized, experienced, and consistent judicial action that encourages sex offenders to take more responsibility and seek rehabilitative assistance. In these specialized courts, communities of stakeholders work collaboratively to prevent future crime. Although somewhat counterintuitive, specialty courts that offer such intensive and specific attention are often more cost effective and efficient than their traditional counterparts. This Note argues that sex offense courts should be expanded beyond the handful of jurisdictions where they currently exist, not only to …

What Remains Of Vicarious Jurisdiction For Establishing General Jurisdiction Over Corporate Defendants After Daimlerag V. Bauman, Keri M. Martin

Keri M. Martin

When, if ever, should a corporation be subject to a court’s jurisdiction based solely on the activities of another entity? Commonly, injured plaintiffs pursue foreign corporations to recover for injuries inflicted upon them by some activity of that corporation or its subsidiary. Where plaintiffs are unable to establish personal jurisdiction over the foreign corporation directly, plaintiffs may attempt to establish jurisdiction over the corporation indirectly by imputing to it the in-forum activities of a closely related subsidiary. This form of jurisdictional blame shifting has been termed “vicarious jurisdiction,” and it stems from the understanding that more than one entity may …

Enlightening The Forgotten: Removal Of State Cases Involving Service-Members Into Federal Courts, Michael C. Walsh

Michael C Walsh

No abstract provided.

Improving Parity In Personal Jurisdiction And Judgment Enforcement In International Cases: A Domestic Proposal To Help Revive The Hague Judgments Convention, Eric Porterfield

Eric Porterfield

Two aspects of American law inadvertently discriminate against American consumers and businesses to the benefit of foreign nationals. Restrictive personal jurisdiction rules often prevent American courts from exercising jurisdiction over foreign nationals on the grounds that they lack sufficient “contact” with the forum. Foreign product manufacturers can use this to their advantage, structuring their business dealings to take advantage of confusing constitutional constraints on personal jurisdiction, reducing, if not eliminating, the risk of potential tort liability in American courts, often leaving American consumers without a remedy and disadvantaging American businesses. American companies, in contrast, cannot avoid American tort law at …

The Concept Of Objectivity In The Uk Supreme Court Through A Comparative Looking Glass, Vito Breda

Vito Breda

This essay reports on the result of hermeneutical research entitled Objectivity in the UK Judicial Discourse. The concept of objectivity generates a plurality of analysis. For instance, in legal theory, MacCormick suggests the possibility of an objective interpretation of cases. Objectivity in the UK Judicial Discourse focuses on the interpretation of the concept by common law judges. In particular, the project sought to map out the cluster of interpretations (and arguments derived therefrom) on the concept of objectivity by the House of Lords and the UK Supreme Court. The result of the study shows that within UK law there …

The Issue Is Being Intersex: The Current Standard Of Care Is A Result Of Ignorance, And It Is Amazing What A Little Analysis Can Conclude., Marla J. Ferguson

marla j ferguson

The Constitution was written to protect and empower all citizens of the United States, including those who are born with Disorders of Sex Development. The medical community, as a whole, is not equipped with the knowledge required to adequately diagnose or treat intersex babies. Intersex simply means that the baby is born with both male and female genitalia. The current method that doctors follow is to choose a sex to assign the baby, and preform irreversible surgery on them without informed consent. Ultimately the intersex babies are mutilated and robbed of many of their fundamental rights; most notably, the right …

Conflicting Federal And State Medical Marijuana Policies: A Threat To Cooperative Federalism, Todd Grabarsky

Todd Grabarsky

The legal status of medical marijuana in the United States is something of a paradox. On one hand, federal government has placed a ban on the drug with no exceptions. On the other hand, over one-third of the states have that legalizes the cultivation, distribution, and consumption of the drug for medical purposes. As such, the usage of medical marijuana is an activity that is at the same time proscribed (by the federal government) and encouraged (by state governments through their systems of regulation and taxation). This Article seeks to shed light on this unprecedented nebulous zone of legality in …

Deciding Who Decides: Searching For A Deference Standard When Agencies Preempt State Law, John R. Ablan

John R Ablan

When a federal agency determines that the statute that it administers or regulations it has promulgated preempt state law, how much deference must a federal court give to that determination? In Wyeth v. Levine, the Supreme Court expressly declined to decide what standard of deference courts should apply when an agency makes a preemption determination pursuant to a specific congressional delegation to do so. Under this circumstance, this Article counsels against applying any single deference standard to an agency’s entire determination. Instead, it observes that preemption determinations are a complex inquiry involving questions of federal law, state law, and …

Too Much Process, Not Enough Service: International Service Of Process Under The Hague Service Convention, Eric Porterfield

Eric Porterfield

Service of process under the Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters (“Hague Service Convention”) is too costly, time consuming, and unreliable. The Hague Service Convention’s defining feature – the Central Authority system – adds unwarranted expense and delay to the already expensive and protracted process of civil litigation. Worse, however, is the fact that the Central Authority completely fails to effect service on a foreign party in a significant percentage of cases. For decades, courts and commentators have argued over whether the Hague Service Convention actually permits litigants to sidestep the …

Investment Dispute Resolution Under The Transpacific Partnership Agreement: Prelude To A Slippery Slope?, Leon E. Trakman Professor

Leon E Trakman Dean

Intense debate is currently brewing over the multistate negotiation of the Transpacific Partnership Agreement [TPPA], led by the United States. The TPPA will be the largest trade and investment agreement after the European Union, with trillions of investment dollars at stake. However, there is little understanding of the complex issues involved in regulating inbound and outbound investment. The negotiating of the TPPA is shrouded in both mystery and dissension among negotiating countries. NGOs, investor and legal interest groups heatedly debate how the TPPA ought to regulate international investment. However this dissension is resolved, it will have enormous economic, political and …

International Money Laundering: The Need For Icc Investigative And Adjudicative Jurisdiction, Michael R. Anderson

Michael Anderson

Money laundering is one of the most pressing issues in the realm of international financial crimes. One of the biggest issues involved in international money laundering is the problem of adjudication. There is no international organization that currently hears these sorts of claims, forcing nations to adjudicate these crimes on their own, often without adequate resources to effectively investigate and enforce their money laundering statutes.

This article argues that, in order to more effectively prevent and adjudicate international money laundering offenses, the International Criminal Court should adopt an international money laundering statute designating these activities as a crime within the …

Beyond Uniqueness: Reimagining Tribal Courts' Jurisdiction, Katherine J. Florey

Katherine J. Florey

If there is one point about tribal status that the Supreme Court has stressed for decades if not centuries, it is the notion that tribes as political entities are utterly one of a kind. This is to some extent reasonable; tribes, unlike other governments, have suffered the painful history of colonial conquest, making some distinctive treatment eminently justifiable. But recent developments have demonstrated to many tribes that uniqueness has its disadvantages. In the past few decades, the Supreme Court has undertaken a near-complete dismantling of tribal civil jurisdiction over nonmembers. Under current law, tribes have virtually no authority to permit …

Immoral Waiver: Judicial Review Of Intra-Military Sexual Assault Claims, Francine Banner

Francine Banner

This essay critiques the application of the Feres doctrine and the policy of judicial deference to military affairs in the context of recent class actions against government and military officials for constitutional violations stemming from sexual assaults in the U.S. military. The Pentagon estimates that 19,000 military sexual assaults occur each year. Yet, in 2011, fewer than two hundred persons were convicted of crimes of sexual violence. In the face of such pervasive and longstanding constitutional violations, this essay argues that the balance of harms weighs heavily in favor of judicial intervention. The piece discusses why, from both legal and …

Judicial Review And Deliberative Politics. A Tension In Need Of Analysis., Donald E. Bello Hutt

Donald E. Bello Hutt

Champions of judicial review of legislation have defended this institution even before John Marshall decided Marbury v. Madison in 1803. Nevertheless, those defenses have to face with several difficulties, both practical and abstract. The aim of this paper is to analyze those difficulties and the context in which the defenses have been successful. We shall discuss the origins of judicial review in the work of James Iredell, Alexander Hamilton and John Marshall in order to introduce not only the first defenses of judicial review, but to fix the political context and dominant constitutional philosophy at their time: departmentalism and popular …

Opting Out Of The Procedural Morass: A Solution To The Class Arbitration Problem, Emanwel J. Turnbull

Emanwel J Turnbull

American class actions are internationally regarded as a procedural form to avoid and widely criticized in the United States. They have been narrowed and restricted by U.S. statutes and case law. Plaintiffs' lawyers in consumer class actions are portrayed as greedy and fraudulent, while businesses are increasingly acting to avoid class actions through mandatory pre-dispute arbitration clauses. Even class arbitration is criticized as leading to a “procedural morass.” This Article proposes that parties and arbitral fora opt out of the American procedural morass (and the attendant long-running disputes about American class actions) by adopting an English procedural rule for aggregation. …

Pirate Accessory Liability – Developing A Modern Legal Regime Governing Incitement And Intentional Facilitation Of Maritime Piracy, Roger L. Phillips

Roger L Phillips

Despite the exponential growth of piracy off the coast of Somalia since 2008, there have been no prosecutions of those who have profited most from ransom proceeds; that is crime bosses and pirate financiers. As U.S. courts begin to charge higher-level pirates, they must ascertain the status of customary international law as reflected in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. UNCLOS includes two forms of accessory liability suited to such prosecutions, but a number of ambiguities remain in the interpretation of these forms of liability. These lacunae cannot be explained by reference to the plain terms of …

Defying Gravity: The Development Of Standards By States In The International Prosecution Of International Atrocity Crimes, Matthew H. Charity

Matthew H Charity

The number of nations that have signed and ratified the Rome Treaty of the International Criminal Court continues to expand, but the number of cases prosecuted remains fairly small. One issue that defies resolution is the place of complementarity in the post-conflict jurisdictional decisions of the I.C.C. and national tribunals. Although the Rome Statute crystallizes definitions of core international crimes, the interpretation of processes leaving jurisdiction with the nation or allowing jurisdiction to the I.C.C. continues to lack structure.

One step that some states have taken in implementing legislation and processes in support of jurisdiction over I.C.C. core crimes is …

Greater And Lesser Powers, Samuel Levin

Samuel Levin

During much of the twentieth century it was relatively stylish for lawyers, judges and justices to argue that an exercise of power was permissible because "the greater power [to do something else] necessarily includes the lesser power [to do this]." Unfortunately, sloppy and unprincipled uses that merely reflected the intuitions of those who invoked it has largely discredited the argument, although it still makes some relevant appearances.

This paper argues that there is a principled way to apply the argument: by looking to the relative harms caused by each exercise of power. However, any notion of "necessarily includes" needs to …

Death To Immunity From Service Of Process Doctrine!, John Martinez

John Martinez

The immunity from service of process doctrine provides that a nonresident cannot be served while going to, attending, and leaving an ongoing judicial proceeding. However, the doctrine evolved while "tag" jurisdiction was in vogue, whereby mere presence in the forum state sufficed, and the nonresident only had to be "tagged" with service to confer jurisdiction on the forum state. This article suggests that modern "minimum contacts" territorial jurisdiction theory more adequately addresses the concerns of efficiency of judicial proceedings and fairness to nonresidents than the immunity from service of process doctrine. The article proposes that the immunity from service of …

Death To Immunity From Service Of Process Doctrine!, John Martinez

John Martinez

Death to Immunity From Service of Process Doctrine!

By John Martinez, Professor of Law

S.J. Quinney College of Law

at the University of Utah

ABSTRACT

The immunity from service of process doctrine provides that a nonresident cannot be served while going to, attending, and leaving an ongoing judicial proceeding. However, the doctrine evolved while "tag" jurisdiction was in vogue, whereby mere presence in the forum state sufficed, and the nonresident only had to be "tagged" with service to confer jurisdiction on the forum state. This article suggests that modern "minimum contacts" territorial jurisdiction theory more adequately addresses the concerns of …

Fragmenting The Judiciary: Potential Ideological Effects Of Shifting Implementation Of Supreme Court Doctrine From Federal Courts To State Courts, Ryan Walters

Ryan Walters

More than ever, the Supreme Court of the United States can rely on an army of life-tenured judges on lower federal courts to implement the doctrines it develops on statutory and constitutional issues. Those judges are shielded from public opinion on controversial rulings, and recent research has shown that the Supreme Court itself is more likely to be affected by elite opinion than that of the public.

Despite checks and balances being a centerpiece of the constitutional order, the increasing size and jurisdictional scope of the federal judiciary, combined with its lack of political accountability, has led to a increase …

Sales Tax Exceptionalism, Andrew J. Haile

Andrew J. Haile

There is something different about the state sales tax, or so it seems based on judicial decisions creating unique jurisdictional and apportionment standards for the tax. This Article explores the concept of “sales tax exceptionalism,” and assesses whether the special treatment afforded to the sales tax is justified by the theoretical foundations of the tax. In particular, the Article examines whether theoretical justifications exist for the unique jurisdictional standard applied to the sales tax (a “physical presence” standard), as compared to the “economic presence” standard applied to the corporate income tax. Ultimately, the Article concludes that only weak theoretical justifications …

Civil Rule 54(B); Seventy-Five And Ready For Retirement, Andrew S. Pollis

Andrew S Pollis

As we commemorate the diamond anniversary of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, this Article takes a critical look at one of the failed rules: Rule 54(b). Although many commentators have noted difficulties with Rule 54(b), this is the first to describe them comprehensively, analyze their root causes, and offer a workable alternative. When an order resolves a discrete claim in a multi-claim action, Rule 54(b) permits a district court to sever the order for immediate appeal by finding “no just reason for delay.” The rule was designed to ease the hardship on litigants who would otherwise have to await …