Jurisdiction Commons^™

Genocide Treaty - Ethnic Cleansing - Substantive And Procedural Hurdles In The Application Of The Genocide Convention To Alleged Crimes In The Former Yugoslavia, John Webb

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

An International Crimes Court: Further Tales Of The King Of Corinth, Jose A. Baez

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

The Pacific War, Continued: Denationalizing International Law In The Senkaku/Diaoyu Island Dispute, Joseph Jackson Harris

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act - Commercial Activity Exception - United States May Exercise Jurisdiction Over A Foreign Sovereign Who Has Issued Promissory Notes To A U.S. Corporation. Shapiro V. Republic Of Bolivia, 930 F.2d 1013 (2d Cir. 1991)., Gregory Jay

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

A Desired Birth: The Court Of First Instance Of The European Communities, Georges Vandersanden

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

To Be Or Not To Be: The Forum Non Conveniens Performance Acted Out On Anglo-American Courtroom Stages, Alan Reed

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Extraterritorial Application Of The United States' Trade Embargo Against Cuba: The United Nations General Assembly's Call For An End To The U.S. Trade Embargo, Jerry W. Cain Jr.

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

"Defensive Territoriality": A New Paradigm For The Prosecution Of Extraterritorial Business Crimes, Ellen S. Podgor

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Equality And The European Union, Elizabeth F. Defeis

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Vladimir Putin And The Rule Of Law In Russia, Jeffrey Kahn

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

A Difficult Situation Made Harder: A Parent's Choice Between Civil Remedies And Criminal Charges In International Child Abduction, Donyale N. Leslie

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Spain's Expanded Universal Jurisdiction To Prosecute Human Rights Abuses In Latin America, China, And Beyond, Mugambi Jouet

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Restrictions On Humanitarian Aid In Darfur: The Role Of The International Criminal Court, Mominah Usmani

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Rethinking The Role And Regulation Of Private Military Companies: What The United States And United Kingdom Can Learn From Shared Experiences In The War On Terror, A. Grayson Irvin

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Losers Always Whine About Their Test: American Nuclear Testing, International Law, And The International Court Of Justice, Ryan C. Burke

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Federal Jurisdiction Over U.S. Citizens' Claims For Violations Of The Law Of Nations In Light Of Sosa, Gwynne Skinner

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Justifying A Prudential Solution To The Williamson County Ripeness Puzzle, Katherine M. Crocker

Georgia Law Review

In the much-maligned 1985 case Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City, the Supreme Court articulated a rule of "ripeness" requiring most Fifth Amendment regulatory- takings claimants to seek 'just compensation" in state court before attempting to litigate in federal court. Williamson County and its progeny have opened a Pandora's box of unforeseen complications, spawning many more questions than they purported to answer. At the forefront is what kind of requirement the rule is anyway. This Article contends that reading Williamson County as grounded in the Constitution (specifically, in Article III or the Fifth Amendment) runs …

Remanding Multidistrict Litigation, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

Scholarly Works

Multidistrict litigation has frequently been described as a “black hole” because transfer is typically a one-way ticket. The numbers lend truth to this proposition. As of 2010, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation remanded only 3.425% of cases to their original districts. That number dwindled to 3.1% in 2012, and to a scant 2.9% in 2013. Retaining cases in hopes of forcing a global settlement can cause a constellation of complications. These concerns range from procedural justice issues over selecting a forum and correcting error, to substantive concerns about fidelity to state laws, to undermining democratic participation ideals fulfilled through …

You're A Crook, Captain Hook! Navigating A Way Out Of The Somali Piracy Problem With The Rule Of Law, Andrew Michael Bagley

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

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 …

Jurisdictional Sequencing, Alan M. Trammell

Georgia Law Review

The Supreme Court has begun to grapple with the
problems presented by the doctrine of jurisdictional
sequencing-the decision of certain issues, and even the
dismissal of cases, before a federal court has verified its
subject matter jurisdiction. Recent jurisprudence has
created confusion as to what, if anything, a federal court
may do before it verifies subject matter jurisdiction.
Moreover, scholars and courts have struggled to discern
an underlying rationale for jurisdictional sequencing, and
no theory has been able to explain the case law fully or
offer a satisfying normative defense of the doctrine.

This Article develops a theory of jurisdictional …

Medellin, Delegation And Conflicts (Of Law), Peter B. Rutledge

Scholarly Works

The case of Medellin v. Texas presented the Supreme Court with a recurring question that has bedeviled judges, legal scholars, and political scientists-what effect, if any, must a United States court give to the decision of an international tribunal, particularly where, during the relevant time, the United States was party to a treaty protocol that bound it to that tribunal's judgments. While the Supreme Court held that the International Court of Justice's ("ICJ") decision was not enforceable federal law, its decision reflected an important recognition that the issues presented in that case were not limited to the specific area of …

The Partially Prudential Doctrine Of Mootness, Matthew I. Hall

Scholarly Works

The conventional understanding of mootness doctrine is that it operates as a mandatory bar to federal court jurisdiction, derived from the "cases or controversies" clause of the United States Constitution, Article III. In two crucial respects, however, this Constitutional model - which was first adopted by the Supreme Court less than 45 years ago - fails to account for the manner in which courts actually address contentions of mootness. First, the commonly-applied exceptions to the mootness bar are not derived from the "cases or controversies" clause and cannot be reconciled with the Constitutional account of mootness. Second, courts regularly consider …

Who's Afraid Of Henry Hart?, Michael Wells

Scholarly Works

No law book has enjoyed greater acclaim from distinguished commentators over a sustained period than has Hart & Wechsler's The Federal Courts and the Federal System. Indeed, the praise seems to escalate from one edition to the next. Reviewing the first edition, published forty-three years ago, Philip Kurland called it "the definitive text on the subject of federal jurisdiction." Paul Mishkin added that "the analysis is of an order difficult to match anywhere." In his review of the second edition, published in 1973, Henry Monaghan began by praising the first for having "deservedly achieved a reputation that is extraordinary among …

International Jurisdiction In Products Liability Cases (Analysis Of Asahi And Post-Asahi Cases), Tsutomu Kuribayashi

LLM Theses and Essays

With the increase of foreign trade, there has also been an increase in the number of foreign manufacturers and distributors involved in product liability litigation in the United States. In many cases, the products from these foreign manufacturers and distributors reach the forum states through the stream of commerce, and are distributed to the customers by regional distributors, wholesalers, and retailers. Therefore, in many product liability cases where defective products from these foreign manufacturers and distributors cause injuries to people in the United States, those foreign companies do not have a direct relationship with the forum states. In these cases, …

The Issue Of The Legal Validity Of Using Economic Sanctions To Enforce Human Rights, Thomas Hailu

LLM Theses and Essays

The international legal regime as it pertains to human rights is neither as established nor as definitive as it appears. It suffers from many disadvantages, the first and most important of which is the fact that the international legal regime has never been capable of effectively enforcing its rules or instituting appropriate remedies for its breaches. Some states have attempted to make up for this inability on behalf of international law by undertaking an enforcement mechanism either unilaterally or multilaterally; economic sanctions are often regarded as valuable tools of enforcement to be used against countries which are allegedly engaged in …

The Recognition And Enforcement Of Foreign Equitable Remedies And Other Types Of Non-Money Judgments In United States And French Courts: A Comparative Analysis, Noele Sophie Rigot

LLM Theses and Essays

Courts of industrialized nations are often faced with adjudication of cases which involve foreign components. It is common for those courts to be asked by individuals or legal entities from a transnational environment to adjudicate with regard to some elements already adjudged in a different legal system as if it were a local judgment. The question that arises is how effects should be given when dealing with prior adjudications. Most countries agree to recognize some effects determined by foreign jurisdictions, as long as those determinations meet standards that guarantee proper integration of the foreign decision into the domestic setting. These …

Choice Of The Applicable Law In United States Maritime Law And The Venezuelan System, Daniel Eric Vielleville

LLM Theses and Essays

International maritime transport is an important means of transport in international trade. The vessels used in international maritime transport face unique dangers which necessitate maritime law that addresses the perils associated with maritime transport. Maritime law concerns many jurisdictions, which creates a special interest for the study of conflict of laws. There are private international maritime laws in addition to multilateral treaties. This paper analyzes the international approach that the United States takes in maritime conflict of laws, and compares it with the Venezuelan system of private international law. Venezuela is a civil law country with old maritime legislation which …

Original Intent And Article Iii, Michael L. Wells, Edward J. Larson

Scholarly Works

Article III of the United States Constitution sets limits on the ability of the legislature to expand or contract the jurisdiction of the federal courts. The Supreme Court has generally held that Article III's restraints on the power of the legislature to restrict the jurisdiction of the federal courts are few and extremely permissive. Many scholars, however, argue that Article III imposes some strong limitations on the legislature's ability to define federal jurisdiction. Strangely, both sides of the debate rely on originalist arguments. This Article argues that reliance on the Framers' intent to resolve issues of federal courts law is …

Behind The Parity Debate: The Decline Of The Legal Process Tradition In The Law Of Federal Courts, Michael L. Wells

Scholarly Works

Whether there is parity between federal and state courts has become a central question in the law of federal courts, dividing judges and commentators into two well-defined camps. Although the issue rarely arose thirty years ago, it now enters into virtually every discussion of the rules concerning access to federal court for constitutional claims. On one side of the debate, advocates of broad federal jurisdiction over constitutional challenges to state action claim that federal courts are better than state courts at adjudicating these controversies. On the other side, advocates of state court jurisdiction insist that state courts are fully adequate …