Jurisdiction Commons^™

Double Jeopardy

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

China's Rule Of Law From A Private International Law Perspective, King Fung Tsang

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Fictional Pleas, Thea Johnson

Indiana Law Journal

A fictional plea is one in which a defendant pleads guilty to a crime he has not committed, with the knowledge of the defense attorney, prosecutor, and judge. With fictional pleas, the plea of conviction is detached from the original factual allegations against the defendant. As criminal justice actors become increasingly troubled by the impact of collateral consequences on defendants, the fictional plea serves as an appealing response to this concern. It allows the parties to achieve parallel aims: the prosecutor holds the defendant accountable in the criminal system, while the defendant avoids devastating noncriminal consequences. In this context, the …

The Territorial Reach Of Federal Courts, A. Benjamin Spencer

Faculty Publications

Federal courts exercise the sovereign authority of the United States when they assert personal jurisdiction over a defendant. As components of the national sovereign, federal courts' maximum territorial reach is determined by the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause, which permits jurisdiction over persons with sufficient minimum contacts with the United States and over property located therein. Why, then, are federal courts limited to the territorial reach of the states in which they sit when they exercise personal jurisdiction in most cases? There is no constitutional or statutory mandate that so constrains the federal judicial reach. Rather, it is by operation …

Malaysia Historical Salvors Revisited:, John P. Given

Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review

No abstract provided.

Zhu And Chen Revisited: An Update On The Ecj’S Jurisprudence On The Derivative Rights Of Third-Party Nationals, David H. King

Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review

No abstract provided.

Rochac Hernández Et Al. V. El Salvador, Kimberly E. Barreto

Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review

This case is about the forced disappearance of five children during El Salvador’s Civil War. The State forcedly took thousands of children to curb rebel forces in rural areas. Unsurprisingly, the Court found violation of several articles of the American Convention, but the case is notable because it addresses Article 19 (Rights of the Child), an article of the Convention rarely discussed.

An Organizational Account Of State Standing, Katherine Mims Crocker

Faculty Scholarship

Again and again in regard to recent high-profile disputes, the legal community has tied itself in knots over questions about when state plaintiffs should have standing to sue in federal court, especially in cases where they seek to sue federal-government defendants. Lawsuits challenging everything from the Bush administration’s environmental policies to the Obama administration’s immigration actions to the Trump administration’s travel bans have become mired in tricky and technical questions about whether state plaintiffs belonged in federal court.

Should state standing cause so much controversy and confusion? This Essay argues that state plaintiffs are far more like at least one …

Persecution Restitution: Removing The Jurisdictional Roadblocks To Torture Victim Protection Act Claims, Michael J. Stephan

Brooklyn Law Review

The Center for Victims of Torture estimates that as many as 1.3 million torture victims are living in the United States, but few of them have ever sought recourse against their offenders. Instead, most victims of torture flee the region where they are at risk of being further victimized and seek refuge in the United States. Fortunately, the United States provides a judicial method of recovery for those who have suffered, even when that suffering took place abroad at the hands of a foreign individual. The Torture Victim Protection Act of 1991, or TVPA, allows torture victims to pursue damages …

Categorical Confusion In Personal Jurisdiction Law, Todd Peterson

Washington and Lee Law Review

In Part I, the Article discusses the history of the U.S. Supreme Court’s substantive due process limitations on personal jurisdiction and, in particular, the standards for corporate-activities-based jurisdiction before the Court’s recent cases on that issue. Part II discusses the Court’s failure to provide a convincing theoretical justification for imposing substantive due process limitations on personal jurisdiction. It also discusses the consequences of that failure in three doctrinal areas of personal jurisdiction law, the traditional basis of service on an individual in the forum state, specific jurisdiction and corporate-activities-based jurisdiction. Part III then analyzes in detail the four recent Supreme …

Recovering Misdirected Trust Assets In The Face Of Torrens Indefeasibility, Alvin W. L. See

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

Where misdirected trust asset consists of, or becomes invested in,registered land, whether the beneficiary could recover it from the recipient isdoubtful given that the Torrens system, through the principle ofindefeasibility, effects a substantial reversal of the priority rules under thegeneral law. The key to unravelling the seemingly contradictory cases on thistopic is to be sensitive to the diversity in drafting and interpretation of thedifferent Torrens legislations, with particular focus on whether the principleof indefeasibility also protects registered volunteers. Through a comparative studyof the Torrens jurisdictions in Australia and Singapore, this article highlightshow the position differs from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and …

If The Shoe Fits: Rethinking Minimum Contacts And The Fsia Commercial Activity Exception, Jacqueline M. Fitch

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

The question explored in this Note is whether, under the direct effect clause of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act commercial activities exception, a foreign sovereign must have minimum contacts with the United States in order for a U.S. court to assert personal jurisdiction over the entity. Examining personal jurisdiction over foreign states under the direct effect clause requires exploring the interaction between constitutional law and principles of international law. The minimum contacts analysis highlights the tension between applying constitutional due process protection to a foreign state, while simultaneously asserting jurisdiction over its commercial activities. Denying jurisdiction over a foreign sovereign …

Jurisdiction And "Definitional Law", John F. Preis

William & Mary Law Review Online

Professor Scott Dodson and I agree that the law of federal jurisdiction needs improvement. We disagree, however, on Congress’s power to make that happen. In an article published in 2017, Dodson argued that “jurisdiction” has an “inherent identity” that “[n]either Congress nor the courts can change.” In an article published the following year, I critiqued this claim. There, I argued that Congress is not obliged to respect jurisdiction’s inherent identity (to the extent it might have one). Rather, Congress need only respect the identity of jurisdiction contained in the United States Constitution. Professor Dodson recently published a rejoinder to my …

Hertz So Good: Amazon, General Jurisdiction's Principal Place Of Business, And Contacts Plus As The Future Of The Exceptional Case, D. (Douglas) E. Wagner

Cornell Law Review

No abstract provided.

Patent Litigators Playing Cowboys And Indians At The Ptab, Michael E. Benson

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

This Essay concerns a new frontier of crafty strategy to keep patents from review by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)—the invocation of tribal sovereign immunity to prevent the PTAB from obtaining (subject-matter) jurisdiction over the patent invalidity dispute.

Part I of this Essay provides background information about a current case in which the litigant has attempted to use tribal sovereign immunity in order to avoid an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding before the PTAB. Part II provides a brief summary of the current relevant law (tribal, patent, administrative, etc.) pertaining to tribal sovereign immunity in the context of …

An Organizational Account Of State Standing, Katherine Mims Crocker

Faculty Publications

Again and again in regard to recent high-profile disputes, the legal community has tied itself in knots over questions about when state plaintiffs should have standing to sue in federal court, especially in cases where they seek to sue federal-government defendants. Lawsuits challenging everything from the Bush administration’s environmental policies to the Obama administration’s immigration actions to the Trump administration’s travel bans have become mired in tricky and technical questions about whether state plaintiffs belonged in federal court.

Should state standing cause so much controversy and confusion? This Essay argues that state plaintiffs are far more like at least one …

Forward: Some Puzzles Of State Standing, Tara Leigh Grove

Faculty Publications

When should states have standing? In recent years, there has been an explosion in literature on that question.1 Yet, even today, there seem to be as many questions as answers. In this Foreword to the Notre Dame Law Review’s 2019 Federal Courts, Practice, and Procedure Symposium on state standing, I discuss a few such puzzles. First, should states have “special” standing when they sue the federal government—that is, greater access to federal court than private parties? Second, and conversely, should states have at least “equal” access to federal court, or should they face more barriers than private parties? These questions …

The Constitutionality Of Ouster Clauses: Nagaenthran A/L K Dharmalingam V Attorney-General [2018] Sghc 112, Benjamin Joshua Ong

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

Section 33B(4) of Singapore’s Misuse of Drugs Act purportedly partly ousts judicial review of the Public Prosecutor’s determination of whether a drug trafficker has substantively assisted the anti-drug enforcement agency. This paper argues that Singapore’s High Court erred in holding this provision constitutionally valid. Ouster clauses are unconstitutional vis-à-vis Articles 12(1) and 93 of the Constitution; the High Court’s view does not accord with the law on non-justiciability and is premised on a flawed theory of legislative intention. It is no answer that judicial power is subject to a ‘balance’ which renders a partial ouster clause constitutionally valid. The High …

Why Rape Should Be A Federal Crime, Donald A. Dripps

William & Mary Law Review

Sexual assault remains at high levels despite decades of legal reforms. The recent wave of accusations against public figures signals both the persistence of the problem and a new political climate for addressing it. The Article argues that Congress should make forcible rape a federal crime, to the limits of the Commerce Clause. This would bring federal assets to the fight against rape by redirecting them from enforcement of possessory crimes. The simple statutory proposal might be accompanied by a more ambitious reorganization of the Justice Department to include a Bureau of Violent Crimes. Replies are offered to objections based …

Apparently, There Are Places Like Home: A Path To Propriety For Consent-By-Registration Jurisdiction In The Third Circuit, Brett E. Broczowski

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

A Jurisdictional Skirmish In The Arkansas Appellate Courts: Rule 37 Post-Conviction Appeals And The Importance Of Supreme Court Rule 1-2(H), J. Thomas Sullivan

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Erecting A Virtual Schoolhouse Gate, Maryam Ahranjani

Faculty Book Display Case

The very first amendment to the United States Constitution protects the freedom of speech. While the Supreme Court held in 1969 that students “do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate,” since then the Court has limited students' freedom of speech, stopping short of considering the boundaries of off-campus, online speech. Lower court holdings vary, meaning that a student engaging in certain online speech may not be punished at all in one state but would face harsh criminal punishments in another. The lack of a uniform standard leads to dangerously inconsistent punishments and poses the ultimate threat to …

Abstention At The Border, Maggie Gardner

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

The lower federal courts have been invoking “international comity abstention” to solve a range of problems in cross-border cases, using a wide array of tests that vary not just across the circuits, but within them as well. That confusion will only grow, as both scholars and the Supreme Court have yet to clarify what exactly “international comity abstention” entails. Meanwhile, the breadth of “international comity abstention” stands in tension with the Supreme Court’s recent reemphasis on the federal judiciary’s obligation to exercise congressionally granted jurisdiction. Indeed, loose applications of “international comity abstention” risk undermining not only the expressed preferences of …

Henry V. Nev. Comm'n On Judicial Discipline, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 5 (Feb. 28, 2019) (En Banc), James Puccinelli

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court held that NRS § 1.428 is constitutional. Thus, hearing masters are subject to the Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline’s jurisdiction.

Venezuela Undermines Gold Miner Crystallex's Attempts To Recover On Its Icsid Award, Sam Wesson

Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review

No abstract provided.

Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Trump, Trade, And Trabajo: Renegotiating Nafta's Labor Accord In A Fraught Political Climate, Lance A. Compa

Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies

Quitting the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and demanding renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)- along with its supplemental labor pact, the North American Agreement on Labor Cooperation (NAALC)-were among the first actions of the new U.S. Administration in 2017. NAFTA renegotiations concluded for the time being-in October 2018 with announcement of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) to replace NAFTA.

Controversial proposals on the bargaining table contained important implications for employment, labor rights, and labor standards in North America. This paper reviews the status of negotiations, the risks of losing the first-ever international instrument linking trade and labor standards …

An Alternative Path To Rule Of Law? Thailand's Twenty-First Century Administrative Courts, Frank Munger

Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies

This study examines why courts made sense to those who established them and how the courts' authority is being utilized. For relatively powerless and resource-poor litigants, barriers to litigation may be many, but when these barriers are overcome, administrative courts exercise extraordinary influence, even when they fail to render a decision fully vindicating a plaintiffs legal rights. Administrative courts serve multiple functions, not only by exercising power, in the famed words of Chief Justice Marshall, "to say what the law is," 13 but also by decentering the concentrated power of Thailand's insular and tradition bound ministries as well as its …

Removal Without Approval? Corporate Litigative Authority To Consent To Federal Removal Where Adverse Parties Are Co-Equal Shareholder Co-Directors, James M. Mcclure

William & Mary Business Law Review

The Case of Swart v. Pawar involved a novel question of law: can a president of a corporation claim authority on behalf of that corporation to consent to federal removal in a suit against a co-equal shareholder co-director even though that president lacks board approval or explicit authority from the business’s bylaws or charter? To address this question, the parties in Swart analogized removal to suit initiation and defense. Since the federal courts hearing the case did not assess the validity of these analogical arguments or a president’s removal authority generally, this Note evaluates the analogies as well as several …

Enforcing Principled Constitutional Limits On Federal Power: A Neo-Federalist Refinement Of Justice Cardozo's Jurisprudence, Robert J. Pushaw Jr.

William & Mary Law Review

Since the New Deal of the mid-1930s, Congress has asserted virtually absolute power to (1) “regulate Commerce ... among the States,” (2) tax and spend for the “general Welfare,” and (3) delegate “legislative Power[ ]” to the executive branch. From 1937 until 1994, the Supreme Court rejected every claim that such statutes had exceeded Congress’s Article I authority and usurped the states’ reserved powers under the Tenth Amendment. Over the past quarter century, conservative Justices have tried, and failed, to develop principled constitutional limits on the federal government while keeping the modern administrative and social welfare state largely intact.

The …