Law Commons^™

Treaty Obligations And National Law: Emerging Conflicts In International Arbitration, William W. Park, Alexander A. Yanos

UC Law Journal

Invoking either forum non conveniens or the absence of personal jurisdiction, several federal courts have refused to enforce foreign arbitral awards. The authors explore the impact of these cases, suggesting that the decisions may put the United States in breach of duties under the New York Arbitration Convention. The resulting damage to reliability in cross-border dispute resolution will inhibit the type of international economic cooperation that benefits both the United States and the larger world community.

With a view to reconciling domestic law and treaty obligations, the Article suggests that enforcement of foreign awards should include a two-step process. Pursuant …

Champagne, Feta, And Bourbon: The Spirited Debate About Geographical Indications, Justin Hughes

UC Law Journal

Geographical Indications (GIs) are terms for foodstuffs that are associated with certain geographical areas. The law of GIs is currently in a state of flux. Legal protection for GIs mandated in the TRIPS Agreement is implemented through appellations law in France and through certification mark systems in the United States and Canada. This Article first examines the state of GIs throughout the world. The author then turns to the continuing debate between the European Union and other industrialized economies over this unique form of intellectual property. The European Union claims that increasing GI protection would aid developing countries, but, in …

Ignoring The Supreme Court: State V. White, The Civil Commitment Of Sexually Violent Predators, And Majoritarian Judicial Pressures, Eric W. Buetzow

UC Law Journal

In Kansas v. Hendricks, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of state statutes that allow for the civil commitment of "sexually violent predators" after completion of their criminal sentences. But the Court in Hendricks left uncertain the precise requirements demanded by substantive due process in this context. Specifically, questions remained regarding whether, and to what degree, a defendant must suffer from volitional inability for the commitment to pass constitutional muster. The Supreme Court responded five years later in Kansas v. Crane, where it held that "there must be proof of serious difficulty in controlling behavior." This could have been considered …