Courts Commons^™

Original Intent: Understanding The Supreme Court's Original Jurisdiction In Controversies Between States, Kristen A. Linsley

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

Erisa Preemption After Gobeille V. Liberty Mutual: Completing The Retrenchment Of Shaw, Edward A. Zelinsky

Articles

Gobeille v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. is the U.S. Supreme Court’s most recent preemption decision under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA). In Gobeille, the Court completed the process of reconciling the restrained approach to ERISA preemption announced in New York State Conference of Blue Cross & Blue Shield Plans v. Travelers Insurance Co. with the Court’s literal and expansive approach adopted earlier in Shaw v. Delta Air Lines, Inc. Gobeille consummated this reconciliation by confirming the sub silentio retrenchment of Shaw and its “plain language” approach in favor of Traveler’s broader construction of ERISA preemption. …

Boundary Dispute: The Presumption Against Extraterritoriality As Judicial Nondelegation, Luke Bell

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Exceptional Role Of Courts In The Constitutional Order, N.W. Barber, Adrian Vermeule

Notre Dame Law Review

This Article looks at a rare part of the judicial role: those exceptional cases when the judge is called upon to pass judgment on the constitution itself. This arises in three groups of cases, roughly speaking. First, in exceptional cases the validity of the constitution and the legal order is thrown into dispute. Second, on some occasions the judge is asked to rule on the transition from one constitutional order to another. Third, there are some cases in which the health of the constitutional order requires the judge to act not merely beyond the law, as it were, but actually …

Conference Of Soviet And American Jurists On The Law Of The Sea And The Protection Of The Marine Environment, Milton Katz, Richard R. Baxter, O. V. Bogdanov, William E. Butler, Thomas M. Franck, Richard Frank, P. P. Gureev, John L. Hargrove, L. A. Ivanaschenko, Y. Kasmin, V. A. Kiselev, B. M. Klimenko, H. G. Knight, O. S. Kolbasov, A. L. Kolodkin, V. M. Koretsky, F. N. Kovalev, V. N. Kudrjavtsev, B. A. Kuvshinnikov, M. I. Lazarev, A. L. Makovsky, Charles W. Maynes, P. A. Moiseev, John N. Moore, A. P. Movchan, T. M. Starzhina, Robert E. Stein, Grigory I. Tunkin, E. T. Usenko, A. F. Vysotsky, A. K. Zhudro

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

Included in the papers for the Conference of Soviet and American Jurists on the Law of the Sea and the Protection of the Marine Environment:

Introduction by Milton Katz and Richard R. Baxter, p. 1

Freedom of Scientific Research in the World Ocean by A.F. Vysotsky, p. 7

The International Law of Scientific Research in the Oceans by Richard R. Baxter, p. 27

Responsibility and Liability for Harm to the Marine Environment by Robert E. Stein, p. 41

Liability for Marine Environment Pollution Damage in Contemporary International Sea Law by A. L. Makovsky, p. 59

Protection of the Marine Environment …

Pennoyer Was Right, Stephen E. Sachs

Faculty Scholarship

Pennoyer v. Neff has a bad rap. As an original matter, Pennoyer is legally correct. Compared to current doctrine, it offers a more coherent and attractive way to think about personal jurisdiction and interstate relations generally.

To wit: The Constitution imposes no direct limits on personal jurisdiction. Jurisdiction isn't a matter of federal law, but of general law -- that unwritten law, including much of the English common law and the customary law of nations, that formed the basis of the American legal system. Founding-era states were free to override that law and to exercise more expansive jurisdiction. But if …

Brief Of Professor Stephen E. Sachs As Amicus Curiae, Bnsf Railway Co. V. Tyrrell, Stephen E. Sachs

Faculty Scholarship

[This brief was filed in support of the petitioner in No. 16-405 (U.S., cert. granted Jan. 13, 2017).]

BNSF Railway Co. should win this case, but on statutory grounds alone. BNSF makes three arguments:

1) That Daimler AG v. Bauman forbids Montana’s exercise of general personal jurisdiction here;

2) That Congress has not sought to license the state’s exercise of jurisdiction; and

3) That such a license would be void under the Fourteenth Amendment.

BNSF’s first two arguments are fully persuasive and decide the case. As a result, the Court should decline to reach the third argument. Not only is …

Custom In Our Courts: Reconciling Theory With Reality In The Debate About Erie Railroad And Customary International Law, Nikki C. Gutierrez, Mitu Gulati

Faculty Scholarship

One of the most heated debates of the last two decades in U.S. legal academia focuses on customary international law’s domestic status after Erie Railroad v. Tompkins. At one end, champions of the “modern position” support customary international law’s (“CIL”) wholesale incorporation into post-Erie federal common law. At the other end, “revisionists” argue that federal courts cannot apply CIL as federal law absent federal legislative authorization. Scholars on both sides of the Erie debate also make claims about the sources judges reference when discerning CIL. They then use these claims to support their arguments regarding CIL’s domestic status. Interestingly, neither …

Reciprocal Legitimation In The Federal Courts System, Neil S. Siegel

Faculty Scholarship

Much scholarship in law and political science has long understood the U.S. Supreme Court to be the “apex” court in the federal judicial system, and so to relate hierarchically to “lower” federal courts. On that top-down view, exemplified by the work of Alexander Bickel and many subsequent scholars, the Court is the principal, and lower federal courts are its faithful agents. Other scholarship takes a bottom-up approach, viewing lower federal courts as faithless agents or analyzing the “percolation” of issues in those courts before the Court decides. This Article identifies circumstances in which the relationship between the Court and other …

What If The International Criminal Court Could Prosecute President Al-Assad For The Chemical Weapon Attacks In Ghouta?, Paul Cho

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract forthcoming.

Sub-Regional Courts In Africa: Litigating The Hybrid Right To Freedom Of Movement, Laurence R. Helfer

Faculty Scholarship

Human rights attorneys and civil society groups in Africa have recently focused their advocacy efforts on sub-regional courts associated with economic integration communities in East, West and Southern Africa. The East African Court of Justice (EACJ), the Court of Justice of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), and the Tribunal of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) have received few suits challenging trade restrictions and other barriers to sub-regional integration. Instead, and surprisingly, the courts’ dockets are dominated by complaints alleging violations of international human rights law.
This article offers the first analysis of EACJ, ECOWAS Court and …

If We Don’T Bring Them To Court, The Terrorists Will Have Won: Reinvigorating The Anti-Terrorist Act And General Jurisdiction In A Post-Daimler Era, Stephen J. Digregoria

Brooklyn Law Review

Prior to the Supreme Court's recent general personal jurisdiction decisions in Daimler AG v. Bauman and Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations S.A. v. Brown American terror victims, injured in terror attacks abroad, were able to bring their attackers and those who sponsor them into United States courts for relief. Specifically, groups like the Palestine Liberation Organization (the PLO) and the Palestinian Authority (the PA) had a history of being sued by American victims of terror. In the course of these suits, the PLO and the PA were regularly found subject to the personal jurisdiction of U.S. courts under a theory of …

Revising Our “Common Intellectual Heritage”: Federal And State Courts In Our Federal System, Judith Resnik

Notre Dame Law Review

This Essay pays tribute to Daniel Meltzer’s insight that, to the extent “lawyers have a common intellectual heritage, the federal courts are its primary source.” I do so by analyzing how that heritage is made and remade, as political forces press Congress to deploy federal courts to protect a wide array of interests and state courts absorb the bulk of litigation. The heritage that Meltzer celebrated and to which he contributed was the outcome of twentieth-century social movements that focused on the federal courts as hospitable venues, serving as vivid sources of rights and remedies. A competing heritage has since …

The Mann Act And Crossing State Lines: Maybe You Should Have Known, Alison Gross

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Expert Workshop Session: The Global Child, Haley Chafin, Jena Emory, Meredith Head, Elizabeth Verner

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Expert Workshop Session: Regulatory Framework, Ashley Ferrelli, Eric Heath, Eulen Jang, Cory Takeuchi

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law - Federalism - As An Incident Of National Sovereignty, The United States Has Paramount Rights And Power In The Seabed And Subsoil Of The Outer Continental Shelf, Stephen O. Spinks

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Newsroom: Monestier On Web Jurisdiction 7/22/2016, Pat Murphy, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

International Straits: The Right Of Access, R. P. Cundick

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

United States Obligations Under Status Of Forces Agreements: A New Method Of Extradition?, William J. Norton

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

International Accountability In U.S. Law: A Call For Legislation, Jonah Diamond

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

No abstract provided.

Right, Title And Interest In The Territorial Sea: Federal And State Claims In The United States, Stephen M. Kiser, Dan A. Aldridge Jr.

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Environmental Protection By Coastal States: The Paradigm From Marine Transport Of Petroleum, Joseph C. Sweeny

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

International Fisheries Regulation, John P. Rivers

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Erdos V. United States: Expansion Of Extraterritoriality And Revival Of Exterritoriality, Gary I. Strausberg

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Law Enforcement As Political Question, Zachary S. Price

Notre Dame Law Review

Across a range of contexts, federal courts have crafted doctrines that limit judicial secondguessing of executive nonenforcement decisions. Key case law, however, carries important ambiguities of scope and rationale. In particular, key decisions have combined rationales rooted in executive prerogative with concerns about nonenforcement’s “unsuitability” for judicial resolution. With one nonenforcement initiative now before the Supreme Court and other related issues percolating in lower courts, this Article makes the case for the latter rationale. Judicial review of nonenforcement, on this account, involves a form of political question, in the sense of the “political question doctrine”: while executive officials hold a …

The Judicial Dilemma O’Callahan V. Parker Presents To Sofa’S, Ernest V. Harris

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Judicial Recusation In The Federal Republic Of Germany, Sigmund A. Cohn

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Some Structural Dilemmas Of World Organization, C. Wilfred Jenks

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

The Teaching Of International Law, Myres S. Mcdougal

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.