Law Commons^™

Kiobel, Extraterritoriality, And The "Global War On Terror", Craig Martin

Maryland Journal of International Law

No abstract provided.

Visible Formalizations And Formally Invisible Facticities, Saskia Sassen

Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies

This essay focuses on a range of formal and informal practices that I hypothesize as the making of new types of jurisdictions with variable relations to the traditional jurisdiction of the state over its territory. One effect is to contribute to an emergent misalignment between territory and territoriality. A second effect is to make structural holes in the tissue of national state sovereign territory. Both processes contribute new types of borderings inside national territory. The action is not on interstate borders, but in the interior of the state, which can mean an extension of one state into another's territorial jurisdiction …

Personal Jurisdiction And Choice Of Law In The Cloud, Damon C. Andrews, John M. Newman

Articles

Cloud computing has revolutionized how society interacts with, and via, technology. Though some early detractors criticized the "cloud" as being nothing more than an empty industry buzzword, we contend that by dovetailing communications and calculating processes for the first time in history, cloud computing is--both practically and legally-a shift in prevailing paradigms. As a practical matter, the cloud brings with it a previously undreamt-of sense of location independence for both suppliers and consumers. And legally, the shift toward deploying computing ability as a service, rather than as a product, represents an evolution to a contractual foundation for interacting.

Already, substantive …

Cross-Border Collective Redress In The European Union: Constitutional Rights In The Face Of The Brussels I Regulation, S. I. Strong

Faculty Publications

This article considers the various issues associated with the creation of a system of collective relief in a region that has traditionally been hostile to the provision of large-scale private litigation. In so doing, the discussion focuses on the clash between certain constitutional rights relating to the ability of the plaintiff to choose the time, place and manner of bringing suit and the European Union’s primary form of legislation concerning cross-border procedure, Council Regulation 44/2001 on jurisdiction and on recognition and enforcement of civil and commercial judgments, commonly known as the Brussels I Regulation.

The Impact Of Local Patent Rules On Rate And Timing Of Case Resolution Relative To Claim Construction: An Empirical Study Of The Past Decade, Pauline M. Pelletier

Journal of Business & Technology Law

No abstract provided.

Cross-Border Collective Redress And Individual Participatory Rights: Quo Vadis?, S. I. Strong

Faculty Publications

This article fills a critical gap in the commentary by undertaking a rights-based analysis of the various issues that arise in cases involving large-scale international litigation, focusing in particular on the Brussels I Regulation and what may be called ‘individual participatory rights’. In so doing, the discussion considers the nature and scope of individual participatory rights in collective litigation as well the ways in which these rights should be weighed and considered. Although the analysis is set in the context of European procedural law, this discussion is of equal relevance to parties outside the European Union, either because they will …

Preliminary Injunction Standards In Massachusetts State And Federal Courts, Arthur D. Wolf

Faculty Scholarship

Concurrent jurisdiction frequently allows attorneys the choice of filing a complaint in state or federal court. State courts presumptively have jurisdiction over claims rooted in federal law. At times, state courts are required to entertain federal claims. Similarly, federal courts have authority over state claims because of diversity, federal question, and supplemental jurisdiction. Many claims are rooted in both state and federal law, such as antitrust, civil rights, environmental, consumer protection, and civil liberties. Confronted with the choice of state or federal court, the attorney must evaluate a variety of factors before deciding in which court to file.

In a …

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

Faculty Scholarship

The International Criminal Court (the “ICC”), now one decade old, is still in the process of setting norms as to scope, jurisdiction, and other issues. One issue that has thus far defied resolution is a key issue of jurisdiction: the place of complementarity in deciding whether certain criminal issues impacting international standards or interests should be decided before the ICC or national tribunals. Although the Rome Statute crystallizes definitions of core international crimes that may be tried before the ICC, the process of determining whether to leave jurisdiction with the nation or allowing jurisdiction to the ICC continues to lack …

Online Communities As Territorial Units: Personal Jurisdiction Over Cyberspace After J. Mcintyre Machinery, Ltd. V. Nicastro, James C. Smith

Saint Louis University Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Resurrecting Court Deference To The Securities And Exchange Commission: Definition Of “Security”, Steven J. Cleveland

Catholic University Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Jurisdiction Of The Court Of Federal Claims And Forum Shopping In Money Claims Against The Federal Government, Gregory C. Sisk

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Jurisdiction And Human Rights Accountability In Indian Country, Kristen Matoy Carlson

Law Faculty Research Publications

No abstract provided.

Authority To Proscribe And Punish International Crimes, Guyora Binder

Journal Articles

Although criminal jurisdiction is usually exercised by governments, offenses can also be proscribed by international law, and punishment can be imposed by international tribunals. This article critically examines the legitimacy of such exercises of international criminal jurisdiction. It reasons that criminal law can plausibly be justified as a cooperative institution that achieves the public good of a rule of law, with its attendant benefits of social peace and equal dignity of persons. It then argues that such a beneficial rule of law requires a punishing authority with the executive capacity to protect those it claims to regulate. It would follow …

Kiobel: Muddling The Distinction Between Prescriptive And Adjudicative Jurisdiction, Anthony J. Colangelo

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

This brief symposium Essay addresses whether and in what ways the Alien Tort Statute (ATS) constitutes an exercise of prescriptive jurisdiction by the United States to regulate conduct or an exercise of adjudicative jurisdiction by U.S. courts to entertain suit, as well as the implications of that classification. The Essay begins with a central and hotly contested focal point in ATS suits — most prominently, in Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum recently decided by the Supreme Court. Namely: how to conceptualize the applicable law in ATS suits and, more specifically, whether courts apply international law directly or some form of …

State Power To Define Jurisdiction, Samuel P. Jordan, Christopher K. Bader

Georgia Law Review

States should have broader authority to decline
jurisdiction over federal claims. The normative
considerations supporting this doctrine of "reverse
abstention" have been developed in previous work. But
what of the Constitution? The traditional reading,
reflected in existing precedent, asserts that the Supremacy
Clause, Article III, and perhaps Article I operate together
to create an inflexible obligation for state courts to hear
federal claims. This reading is misguided. The
Supremacy Clause contains no jurisdictional obligation of
its own force, but only gives supreme effect to other validly
enacted federal laws. And no other clause provides the
authority to impose such an …

The Surveillance Society And The Third-Party Privacy Problem, Shaun B. Spencer

South Carolina Law Review

No abstract provided.

Toward A Better Understanding Of Ripeness And Free Speech Claims, Wm. Grayson Lambert

South Carolina Law Review

No abstract provided.

Constraining The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure Through The Federalism Canons Of Statutory Interpretation, Margaret S. Thomas

Journal Articles

The doctrine for deciding when to apply the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to state claims heard in federal court has become a quagmire of exceptions and ephemeral distinctions, in large measure due to the persistent difficulty courts have in separating substantive rules from procedural ones in an era where special procedural rules are often used as an essential regulatory tool in state governance. This article examines the power of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to displace contrary state law in diversity cases by focusing on the limited functional competence of the Supreme Court and its Advisory Committee to displace …

Judicial Review For Enemy Fighters: The Court’S Fateful Turn In Ex Parte Quirin, The Nazi Saboteur Case, Andrew Kent

Faculty Scholarship

The emerging conventional wisdom in the legal academy is that individual rights under the U.S. Constitution should be extended to noncitizens outside the United States. This claim - called globalism in my article - has been advanced with increasing vigor in recent years, most notably in response to legal positions taken by the Bush administration during the war on terror. Against a Global Constitution challenges the textual and historical grounds advanced to support the globalist conventional wisdom and demonstrates that they have remarkably little support. At the same time, the article adduces textual and historical evidence that noncitizens were among …

Judging The Flood Of Litigation, Marin K. Levy

Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court has increasingly considered a particular kind of argument: that it should avoid reaching decisions that would “open the floodgates of litigation.” Despite its frequent invocation, there has been little scholarly exploration of what a floodgates argument truly means, and even less discussion of its normative basis. This Article addresses both subjects, demonstrating for the first time the scope and surprising variation of floodgates arguments, as well as uncovering their sometimes-shaky foundations. Relying on in-depth case studies from a wide array of issue areas, the Article shows that floodgates arguments primarily have been used to protect three institutions: …

Spatial Legality, Due Process, And Choice Of Law In Human Rights Litigation Under U.S. State Law, Anthony J. Colangelo, Kristina Kiik

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

Framing the topic of this symposium as “Human Rights Litigation in State Courts and Under State Law” effectively orients the discussion around the rights of plaintiffs from the outset, the central question being whether they have enforceable rights in U.S. state courts under state law. Standing in the way are various legal doctrines. In broad strokes, the relevant questions become: Which doctrines do, or should, either facilitate or obstruct human rights litigation in U.S. state courts and under state law? How are courts applying these doctrines? How should courts apply these doctrines?

Many of the doctrines that potentially stand in …

The Alien Tort Statute And The Law Of Nations In Kiobel And Beyond, Anthony J. Colangelo

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

In Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum the U.S. Supreme Court wrongly applied a presumption against extraterritoriality to claims authorized by the Alien Tort Statute (ATS). Even assuming such a presumption properly could extend to the ATS and claims authorized thereunder, the presumption is easily overcome by Congress’s unambiguous instruction that the statute encompasses violations of “the law of nations,” which includes both substantive and jurisdictional components — including principles of extraterritorial jurisdiction. Early 19th Century case law and congressional reaction thereto clearly demonstrate that Congress expressly invoked “the law of nations” to overturn the Court’s imposition of a limiting presumption …

State V. Jim: A New Era In Washington's Treatment Of The Tribes?, Matthew Deisen

American Indian Law Review

No abstract provided.

Can Federal Courts Exercise Jurisdiction Over State Law Malpractice Claims Arising Out Of Patent Law Disputes?, Isaac C. Ta

St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1338, federal courts generally have original jurisdiction over cases arising under federal civil law. Specifically, under 28 U.S.C. § 1338(a), federal courts have jurisdiction over cases brought under federal patent laws. As with any legal proceeding, the potential for legal malpractice as it relates to patent issues (e.g., proper patent filing) is very real. However, unlike patent law proceedings, legal malpractice is governed by state law.' When the two causes of action are intertwined, federal and state courts are presented with the issue of which court possesses proper jurisdiction. Some argue federal courts can properly exercise …

Misplaced Boldness: The Avoidance Of Substance In The International Court Of Justice's Kosovo Opinion, Timothy W. Waters

Articles by Maurer Faculty

The International Court of Justice's Kosovo Advisory Opinion is a masterpiece of avoidance. The Court has lived to run another day, and one can only admire the judges' skill in arriving at the vacant place between difficult and clashing conclusions of substance. Still, in the wake of the Opinion, questions inevitably arise: Of what use is this document? Has it advanced a project of justice, or of law? The Opinion has done something, though not, perhaps, what it purports to do. To understand it, we must engage this cautious, crimped document in its full context-or rather, we must understand the …

Kiobel V. Royal Dutch Petroleum: The Alien Tort Statute's Jurisdictional Universalism In Retreat, Kenneth Anderson

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum (Shell), a long-running Alien Tort Statute (ATS) case brought by Nigerian plaintiffs alleging aiding and abetting liability against various multinational oil companies for human rights violations of the Nigerian government in the 1990s, including a non-US Shell corporation, first came before the US Supreme Court in the 2011-2012 term, following a sweeping Second Circuit holding that there was no "liability for corporations" under the ATS. In oral argument, however, several Justices asked a different question from corporate liability: noting that the case involved foreign plaintiffs, foreign defendants, and conduct taking place entirely on foreign sovereign …

Hamdan V. United States: A Death Knell For Military Commissions?, Jennifer Daskal

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

In October 2012, a panel of the D.C. Circuit dealt a blow to the United States’ post- September 11, 2001 decade-long experiment with military commissions as a forum for trying Guantanamo Bay detainees. Specifically, the court concluded that prior to the 2006 statutory reforms, military commission jurisdiction was limited to violations of internationally-recognized war crimes; that providing material support to terrorism was not an internationally-recognized war crime; and that the military commission conviction of Salim Hamdan for material support charges based on pre-2006 conduct was therefore invalid. Three months later, a panel of the D.C. Circuit reached the same conclusion …

Jurisdiction In Nineteenth Century International Law And Its Meaning In The Citizenship Clause Of The Fourteenth Amendment, Robert E. Mensel

Saint Louis University Public Law Review

This article addresses the meaning of the citizenship clauses of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the Fourteenth Amendment by augmenting the historical record relevant to those clauses. It argues that the key to understanding their meaning lies in the nineteenth century concept of allegiance, the central concept in the international law of citizenship and subjecthood in the nineteenth century. International law, diplomatic history, and international conflict centered around that concept, reveal complexities not fully explored in the previous scholarly literature on the citizenship clauses. Conflicting national claims to the allegiance of subjects and citizens and to the duties …

Kiobel V. Royal Dutch Petroleum: Delineating The Bounds Of The Alien Tort Statute, Tara Mcgrath

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

This commentary previews the upcoming Supreme Court case, Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., in which the Court will address questions regarding the Alien Tort Statute and its applicability to foreign conduct and foreign litigants. The case will require the Court to reexamine the bounds of a long-ago established tort doctrine in light of more modern considerations and developments in international law.

Talking Chalk: Defacing The First Amendmen In The Public Forum, Marie A. Failinger

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.