Jurisdiction Commons^™

Selective Flexibility: The Hidden Evolution Of Startup Corporate Law, Alvaro Pereira

Cardozo Law Review

This Article challenges the longstanding assumption that corporate law is largely irrelevant to non-listed companies and venture capital ( “VC”). Through a novel cross-country legal index covering twenty years and twelve jurisdictions, this Article shows that corporate laws have evolved through a process of “selective flexibility,” where certain legal barriers to VC deals are lifted, while others are stealthily preserved. For example, numerous reforms have enabled multiple-vote shares, but few have authorized the customization of board powers, limiting the universe of founder-investor agreements—and, ultimately, the development of startup ecosystems and VC markets.

Drawing on a comprehensive dataset of billion -dollar …

The Territorial Continuum: American Samoa, Criminal Adjudication, And Territorial Administration, Emmanuel Hiram Arnaud

Cardozo Law Review

The standard account of American territorial expansion posits that territorial acquisition moved along a spectrum of sovereignty. The federal government acquired new inhabited land through conquest or purchase, and the Constitution tasked Congress with organizing and administering the new territories until they were ready to become states. That pattern came to an abrupt halt in 1898 when, at the conclusion of the Spanish-American War, the Supreme Court, fearing the extension of citizenship to and the permanent integration of non-White populations into the American polity, suddenly pronounced that the Constitution authorized the holding of colonies. The Court thus sentenced new territories, …

Post-Chevron Deference In Asylum Proceedings, Shawn E. Fields

Cardozo Law Review

The Supreme Court held for four decades that Chevron deference should apply in all immigration proceedings. How, then, will asylum proceedings change in a post-Chevron world? When, and under what circumstances, will courts continue to defer to the findings of immigration judges and the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA)? And why does it matter? This Article answers those questions.

These issues require urgent examination for three reasons. First, they directly confront an issue pending before the U.S. Supreme Court in Urias-Orellana v. Bondi: Without the protection of Chevron insulating BIA decisions from meaningful judicial review, can certain legal questions like …

Much Ado About Misjoinder: An Alternative To Fraudulent Misjoinder To Preserve Defendants’ Right To Removal In Pharmaceutical And Medical Device Products Liability Cases, Alexander Flaum

Cardozo Law Review

Unresolved questions surrounding the contours of the fraudulent misjoinder doctrine have understandably led to reluctance by courts to adopt it, despite its utility in protecting defendants’ access to federal court. This is particularly troubling in the context of pharmaceutical and medical device products liability cases. It is common in these actions for plaintiffs, whose only connection is having consumed a particular pharmaceutical product at different points in time and for different durations, to strategically join in one action to defeat complete diversity and prevent removal to federal court. However, federal courts are not powerless to prevent such procedural gamesmanship. By …

When The Internet Attacks, Craig Cowie

Cardozo Law Review

Courts have struggled with applying personal jurisdiction in cases involving intentional torts where the defendants act outside the forum, and the problem is particularly apparent and acute when the defendants use the internet to commit the tort. For example, is there jurisdiction when a defendant doxxes someone and calls for violence? What if they leave a bad Yelp review? Or tweet a defamatory statement? Courts have used many tests for determining whether personal jurisdiction is appropriate in these situations, but there has been relatively little recent scholarship on whether these tests are appropriate for analyzing personal jurisdiction in these contexts. …

Furthering The Legacy Of Benjamin B. Ferencz: Amending The Rome Statute’S Jurisdiction Over The Crime Of Aggression, Jennifer Trahan

Cardozo International & Comparative Law Review

The article advocates for amending the Rome Statute to strengthen the International Criminal Court's (ICC) jurisdiction over the crime of aggression. It argues that the current jurisdictional regime, established by the 2010 Kampala amendments, is too limited, creating double standards and undermining the rule of law. The author calls for harmonizing the ICC's jurisdiction over the crime of aggression with its jurisdiction over other crimes, such as genocide and war crimes, to ensure consistent and universal accountability.

A Conversation With Judge Shira Scheindlin, Burt Neuborne & Jeffrey Toobin, Benjamin N. Cardozo School Of Law, Judge Shira Scheindlin, Burt Neuborne, Jeffrey Toobin

2025 Event Invitations

Join us for a discussion on judicial independence and impartiality with Judge Shira Scheindlin, NYU Law Professor Burt Neuborne, and author Jeffrey Toobin. In Floyd v. City of New York (2013), Judge Scheindlin ruled that the NYPD’s stop-and-frisk program was unconstitutional, ordering reforms and oversight. Days later, the Second Circuit reassigned the case, citing concerns about the appearance of impartiality due to her public statements. Professor Neuborne, who objected to her removal in a brief to the court, and Toobin, who covered the case for The New Yorker, will join Judge Scheindlin to examine the implications of this decision and …

Towards The Faa's Next Century: Clarifying Disclosure Requirements In Arbitration, Andrea K. Schneider, Brian Farkas

Articles

This essay provides a roadmap to the current landscape of neutrality and disclosure. It then suggests three possible reforms to the FAA that would provide better guidance to arbitrators, parties, and courts. Moreover, this essay argues that if the FAA cannot be sufficiently amended, states should take the lead. States can continue to more clearly outline disclosure requirements and enforce clearer standards than the current version of the FAA.

Correcting Course: How Congress Can Streamline U.S. Engagement With The International Criminal Court, Sophia N. Ramcharitar

Cardozo Law Review de•novo

Since its participation in the 1998 Rome Conference, the United States has vocalized opposition to key components of the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) jurisdiction. This opposition has informed longstanding positions taken by the executive branch and motivated anti-ICC legislation passed by Congress. Support for the ICC’s investigation in Ukraine challenged these narratives across the legislative and executive branches, but the ICC’s arrest warrants of Israeli officials in 2024 renewed Congress’s heightened skepticism of the court and sowed political divisions on efforts to sanction the ICC. Congress’s oscillation on the ICC within the past several years prompts a larger question of …

Power For The People: Recognizing The Constitutional Right To Vote For President, Charlie Martel

Cardozo Law Review

On January 6, 2021, a mob attacked the United States Capitol to overthrow the certification of the legitimately elected president and install the election loser, Donald Trump. Before this, there was another coup attempt. Trump and his team pressured state legislators and officials not to certify legitimately elected presidential electors, and to instead certify fake electors for Trump. This was based on the theory that the Constitution grants states “plenary power” to select presidential electors, even if this means cancelling citizen elections or rejecting their outcome. The coups failed—this time.

There should be no next time. The Supreme Court should …

Incentivizing Innovation In The Realm Of Social Goods: Patent Law's Unintended Inhibiting Effect On Environmental Technological Advancement, Ethan Graham

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

The note argues that while Direct Air Capture (DAC) technology holds significant potential to address climate change by removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, its development and deployment are hindered by the gatekeeping mechanism of patents. These patents, though intended to incentivize innovation, often stifle progress by restricting access to critical technologies. The analysis highlights the urgency of climate action, the limitations of current legal frameworks, and the need for policy reforms to accelerate DAC innovation and mitigate global warming.

Jefferson's Ghost: The Local Action Rule In Federal Courts, Jeffrey L. Rensberger

Cardozo Law Review

The local action rule required that certain actions concerning real property be adjudicated in the federal court in the state (and perhaps the district) containing the property. This rule had been apart of the law of the United States since the early days of the nation. In 2011, Congress eliminated the local action rule as a matter of venue. But some courts have held that the local action rule pertains to subject matter jurisdiction, not merely venue, and that it survived Congress's elimination of the venue aspect of the rule. This is wrong as to cases in federal court involving …

Learning From Guantanamo: Avoiding Legal Black Holes In Outer Space, Mia Bonardi

Cardozo International & Comparative Law Review

"Legal black holes" are spaces beyond the reach of enforceable law and thus inflict people within their pull with "rightlessness." The term "legal black hole" arose originally around the Guantinamo Bay detention center, but it has since been used in other contexts, such as migrant drownings. There is a new frontier for legal black holes in the space beyond Earth. This topic is timely and pertinent to modern application because if places or spaces exist where fundamental laws cannot be applied or enforced, then such legal black holes undermine the rule of law.

This Article argues that outer space is, …

The Future Of Arbitration In The United States: Textualism, A Tectonic Shift, And A Reshaping Of The Civil Justice System, Imre S. Szalai

Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution

No abstract provided.

Dickens V. Lee (1844): A Christmas Tale Of Two Experts Testifying, Mark Rose

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

The article examines the 1844 case of Dickens v. Lee, highlighting its significance as an early example of the use of expert witnesses in copyright disputes. Dickens successfully sued over the unauthorized adaptation of A Christmas Carol, but the case underscores the challenges of balancing literary and commercial considerations in copyright law. The defense's use of expert testimony to argue market differentiation contrasts with the court's focus on literary similarity, foreshadowing modern debates on substantial similarity in copyright infringement.

Hamptons Aesthetics Vs. Shinnecock Rights: How The Federal Government Is Failing To Protect Indigenous Sovereignty From State Judicial Infringement, Lindsay M. Brocki

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The note examines the conflict between the Shinnecock Nation's sovereignty and state interference, highlighting the federal government's failure to protect indigenous sovereignty. It uses the Shinnecock Nation's legal battle over billboards as a case study to argue for stronger federal protection against state encroachment.

Interrogating The Nonincorporation Of The Grand Jury Clause, Roger A. Fairfax Jr.

Cardozo Law Review

With the Supreme Court’s recent incorporation—in Ramos v. Louisiana—of the Sixth Amendment’s jury unanimity requirement to apply to the states, the project of “total incorporation” is all but complete in the criminal procedure context. Virtually every core criminal procedural protection in the Bill of Rights has been incorporated through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to constrain not only the federal government, but also the states—with one exception. The Fifth Amendment’s grand jury right now stands alone as the only federal criminal procedural right the Supreme Court has permitted states to ignore. In one of the earliest incorporation …

Disinformation On Trial: Fighting Foreign Disinformation By Empowering The Victims, Ari B. Rubin

Cardozo Law Review

Foreign disinformation catapulted into the national spotlight with the 2016 presidential election, but its impact is not confined to the electoral map or season. This Article addresses the threat of foreign disinformation by proposing a new statute: a private right of action, enabling harmed persons to directly sue state or private actors, foreign or domestic, who knowingly or recklessly spread disinformation from abroad. Scholars and policymakers have proposed other, far-flung solutions ranging from greater online security to outright censorship. Each of those ideas stumbles on common challenges and lacks a valuable ingredient: an interested party, directly harmed by the foreign …

Keynote Address, Christopher J. Buccafusco, Jeff Kosseff

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

The article discusses the evolution and impact of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, highlighting its role in shaping internet speech and liability. It traces the law's origins, key court rulings, and current debates about its future. The speaker emphasizes the need for informed discussion to address concerns about harmful content, platform moderation, and free speech.

Winning, Defined? Text-Mining Arbitration Decisions, Charlotte S. Alexander, Nicole G. Iannarone

Cardozo Law Review

Who wins in consumer arbitration? Historically, this question has been nearly impossible to answer, as most arbitration proceedings are a private black box, and arbitral forums release only limited summary statistics. One exception is the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), which arbitrates virtually all disputes between investors and stockbroker-dealers, and makes all of its nearly 60,000 written arbitration decisions publicly available in an online database. This Article is the first to use computational text analysis tools to study these decisions, and to construct a measure of the claimants’ win, loss, and settlement rates. It is the first installment in an …

Legalizing Undocumented Work, Jennifer J. Lee

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Exhausting Comity-Based Abstention In The Fsia’S Expropriation Exception, Avi Rosskamm

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Protecting The Children Of Indian Country: A Call To Expand Tribal Court Jurisdiction And Devote More Funding To Indian Child Safety, Adam Crepelle

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The article argues that the legal framework governing Indian country, particularly the Supreme Court's decision in *Oliphant v. Suquamish Indian Tribe*, has failed to protect Indian women and children from violence, perpetuating a crisis of sexual assault, child abuse, and murder. It contends that affirming tribal sovereignty and expanding tribal jurisdiction over non-Indians are essential to addressing these issues and ensuring the safety and well-being of Indian children.

Defending "Universal Vacatur" - Nationwide Injunctions For Administrative Law, Michael E. Herz

Online Publications

The nationwide injunction has seized the imagination of courts and law professors in recent years. Not surprisingly, JOTWELL’s pages screens have given it extensive attention. Recent jots have described important work by Samuel Bray (twice), Amanda Frost (also twice), Russell Weaver, and Alan Trammell that attacks, defends, or theorizes nationwide (or “universal”) injunctions. Jack Beermann, in praising Bray and Frost, did have one complaint: “As an administrative law nut, I wish they both grappled more with the meaning of the APA’s instruction that reviewing courts should ‘hold unlawful and set aside’ unlawful agency action.” Mila Sohoni has now filled that …

From The Frying Pan To The Fire: Scotus’ Fsia Inaction As Further Permitting Executive Branch Intervention In “Takings Exception” Cases And Its Consequences In Forcing Holocaust Plaintiffs To Return To Europe, Richard H. Weisberg

Articles

The Supreme Court of the United States (“SCOTUS”) very recently punted and left wide a circuit split on a key question under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (“FSIA”): Do plaintiff Holocaust victims need to return to the country that wronged them in order to proceed in a United States federal court that otherwise had jurisdiction over their claims? While sending down unresolved a conflict between the D.C. and Seventh Circuits, in a companion case also involving Holocaust victims, SCOTUS essentially ended an action against Germany by taking the strong suggestion of the Executive Branch through its Solicitor General that a …

Counterterrorism 2.0, Deborah Pearlstein

Articles

Are there any lessons to be gleaned for combatting the rising threat of white nationalist terrorism today from the U.S. response to the attacks of 9/11 twenty years on? This symposium reflection suggests that among the most important lessons may be in avoiding the conceptually defining characteristics of the early U.S. response in 2001. Detainee torture and abuse, the embrace of trial by newly formed military commission, and other misguided policies and practices whose effects are still felt today were set in motion in the first few weeks after the attacks, driven by the instinct to do something, bolstered by …

Claim Preclusion And The Problem Of Fictional Consent, Lindsey D. Simon

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Redeeming Globalization Through Unfair Competition Law, Sean A. Pager, Eric Priest

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Terrible Touhy: Navigating Judicial Review Of An Agency's Response To Third-Party Subpoenas, Zoe Niesel

Cardozo Law Review

The question of judicial review of a federal agency's response to a third-party subpoena is highly litigated, and yet barely addressed in academic literature. For seventy years, this issue has been governed by the Supreme Court's holding in United States ex rel. Touhy v. Ragen, a case that spawned its own vocabulary, its own legal doctrine, and its own circuit split. The confusion has left four circuit courts entrenched, the remainder waffling and the district courts largely on their own to sort out a workable standard.

This Article establishes that the circuit courts' approaches to judicial review of an agency's …

A Knock On Knick'S Revival Of Federal Takings Litigation, Stewart Sterk, Michael C. Pollack

Articles

In Knick v. Township of Scott, the United States Supreme Court held that a landowner who claimed to have suffered a taking at the hands of state or local officials could seek redress in federal court without the need to first seek compensation through state proceedings. This holding raises serious theoretical and practical concerns. On the theoretical side, Knick rests on the implicit assumption that states separate powers among branches of government in the same way the federal government does. It also relies on a second assumption: that relegating taking claims to state court makes them unique. Neither is …