Law Commons^™

Over ©S: Dilemmas In Establishing Jurisdiction Over Foreign Sovereigns In Us Courts For Intellectual Property Infringement, Katherine Dutcher

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

When a foreign state infringes a US-held intellectual property right abroad, it is unclear to what extent the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 (FSIA) bars suit in US courts. The FSIA's already complex commercial activity exception, which governs such actions, was further obfuscated by the Supreme Court's decision in Republic of Argentina v. Weltover, which held that "substantiality" and "foreseeability" could not be used to determine whether a foreign sovereign's conduct had a "direct effect" in the United States, thus warranting jurisdiction in a US court. In the context of IP infringement, where harms may be abstract and unquantifiable, …

Foreign Official Immunity Determinations In U.S. Courts: The Case Against The State Department, Ingrid Wuerth Brunk

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

The immunity of foreign states from suit in U.S. courts is governed by a federal statute, the Foreign Soveriegn Immunities Act (FSIA). This statute does not apply to the immunity of individual foreign officials, however, as the Supreme Court recently held in Samantar v. Yousuf Instead, the Court reasoned, the immunity of foreign government officials is controlled by common law. But there is no extant body offederal or state common law governing foreign official immunity, and the Court did not clarify how this law should be developed going forward. The State Department claims that it holds constitutional power to make …

Foreign Official Immunity After Samantar, Chimene I. Keitner

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

In Samantar v. Yousuf, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSLA) does not govern the immunity of foreign officials from legal proceedings in U.S. courts. Part I of this symposium contribution seeks to put in sharper focus exactly what is, and what is not, in dispute following Samantar. Part II presents three challenges to common assumptions about conduct-based immunity, which I consider under the headings of personal responsibility, penalties, and presence. Under the heading of personal responsibility, I emphasize that state responsibility and individual responsibility are not mutually exclusive. Under penalties, I argue that …

Book Review, Michael C. Doland

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

The book is divided into two parts. The first part addresses those subjects that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act covers in detail, including the definition of foreign states and foreign government-owned corporations, judicial competence, jurisdiction, immunity, service of process, venue, and execution of judgments. The second part addresses those subjects that the Act covers in a cursory fashion, including burden of proof, rights of discovery, available remedies, and jury trials. In addition, the book treats those topics that received virtually no discussion under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act but that are essential to its understanding and enforcement, including the act …

Terrorism, Extradition, And Fsia Relief: The Letelier Case, Eric H. Singer

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

The cases involving Orlando Letelier and Michael Townley raise a number of questions about extradition and state-sponsored terrorism. As shown by the United States' failure to obtain the three Chilean requestees (and Argentina's failure to obtain Townley), extradition is an unreliable and thus inadequate means to cope with state-sponsored terrorism. To deter such conduct may call for greater inventiveness in identifying and implementing effective sanctions. The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) seemingly offers an alternative to extradition and a remedy for acts of state-sponsored terrorism under its noncommercial torts exception. This remedy, however, is uncertain in light of recent court …

Jurisdiction Over Foreign Governments, Melissa L. Werthan, Nancie L. Combs, Jeffrey L. Deitch, Anita L. Fuoss

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

Passage of the FSIA in 1976 codified the restrictive theory of sovereign immunity, which provides that a foreign state will re-main immune from suit for its public acts but will lose immunity for its private and commercial acts. By placing the determination of a foreign government's immunity in the hands of the judiciary, Congress attempted to standardize an area of the law that had been governed by political relations between the United States and foreign governments.

The FSIA is the exclusive mechanism through which private parties can seek redress against foreign governments in United States courts. The Act provides a …

Nlrb Jurisdiction Over Foreign Governments, Dan T. Carter

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

In State Bank of India the National Labor Relations Board reversed its discretionary abstention policy and asserted jurisdiction over the American operations of a foreign government employer. Previously the Board had declined to assert jurisdiction over these employers out of deference to foreign sovereigns, and because of the Supreme Court's admonition against extraterritorial application of the National Labor Relations Act in the absence of "an affirmative intention of the Congress clearly expressed." The Board now believes that neither public policy nor the policies of the NLRA can justify abstention. Although the Board has deemed the recently enacted Foreign Sovereign Immunities …