Law Commons^™

Rethinking Conspiracy Jurisdiction In Light Of Stream Of Commerce And Effects-Based Jurisdictional Principles, Alex Carver

Vanderbilt Law Review

For decades, some courts have been willing to exercise personal jurisdiction over nonresident defendants based solely on the forum contacts of their coconspirators. This practice, termed "conspiracy jurisdiction," has proven controversial among courts and commentators alike. On one hand, the actions of one member of a conspiracy are ordinarily attributable to other members of the conspiracy, and jurisdiction-conferring acts should arguably be no exception. On the other hand, attributing forum contacts from one actor to another based solely on their joint membership in a civil conspiracy seems to stretch due process protections to the breaking point. This Note provides new …

Contorting Common Article 3, Michael A. Newton

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

This short Essay describes the circularity of support between the ICRC and the Pre-Trial Chambers of the ICC. Its successive sections describe the problematic potential of extending the substantive coverage of Common Article 3 to encompass members of the same armed group who commit criminal acts against one another.' In particular, the Revised Commentary fails to address the due process ramifications of an enlarged Common Article 3, even as the development of the text documented by the readily available negotiating record warrants an alternative understanding. Lastly, the ICRC position could indicate a radical shift in the very design of the …

Predictive Due Process And The International Criminal Court, Samuel C. Birnbaum

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

The International Criminal Court (ICC) operates under a regime of complementarity: a domestic state prosecution of a defendant charged before the ICC bars the Court from hearing the case unless the state is unable or unwilling to prosecute the accused. For years, scholars have debated the role of due process considerations in complementarity. Can a state that has failed to provide the accused with adequate due process protections nonetheless bar a parallel ICC prosecution? One popular view, first expressed by Professor Kevin Jon Heller, holds that due process considerations do not factor into complementarity and the ICC could be forced …

War Crimes Jurisdiction And Due Process: The Bangladesh Experience, Jordan J. Paust, Albert P. Blaustein

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

Must any state that holds and controls prisoners either prosecute those accused of having committed serious violations of international law or extradite them to a state that will prosecute? Finally, would similar breaches of international law by India or Indian troops obviate any jurisdictional competence or duties of India or Bangladesh?

The questions seemed unusual, at least in view of the past practices of international tribunals of the United States in prosecutions of its nationals. Specific criminal applications of relevant international norms had been relatively sparse.' There were problems with the applicability of international norms to Bangladesh, especially during the …

Political Prisoners: The Law And Politics Of Protection, David P. Forsythe

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

In the fall of 1975 the United States, in a much publicized step at the United Nations, introduced an abortive resolution calling for world-wide amnesty for political prisoners. Admittedly, this draft resolution was withdrawn because of crippling amendments, and it may well be that this American initiative was launched more to deflect criticism to others than to help political prisoners. But it seems to be the case--at least from a Western perspective--that political prisoners are becoming a more salient subject in world affairs. The concept of political prisoners has existed for quite awhile. In the last decade and a half, …

Jurisdiction--The Short-Lived Death Of The Ker-Frisbie Doctrine, C. Jedson Nau

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

Why the Second Circuit Court of Appeals chose to retreat from its Toscanino holding is unclear. The drastic nature of the remedy afforded by Toscanino to any defendant illegally abducted has been criticized as too inflexible. On the other hand, the Lujan rule allows the remedy only in the limited circumstances of egregious conduct. The problem remains to determine what remedy, if any, should be available to victims who are subjected to illegal but not outrageous governmental conduct.

The government has vigorously argued that federal narcotics law enforcement depends upon the freedom of officers to abduct suspects, particularly from South …