Discretion, Delegation, And Defining In The Constitution's Law Of Nations Clause,
2012
Northwestern University School of Law
Discretion, Delegation, And Defining In The Constitution's Law Of Nations Clause, Eugene Kontorovich
Faculty Working Papers
Never in the nation's history has the scope and meaning of Congress's power to "Define and Punish. . . Offenses Against the Law of Nations" mattered as much. The once obscure power has in recent years been exercised in broad and controversial ways, ranging from civil human rights litigation under the Alien Tort Statue (ATS) to military commissions trials in Guantanamo Bay. Yet it has not yet been recognized that these issues both involve the Offenses Clauses, and indeed raise common constitutional questions.First, can Congress only "Define" offenses that clearly already exist in international law, or does it have discretion …
Getting Nowhere: Florida's Failed Choice Of Law Approach To Torts And A Proposal For Change,
2012
Florida A&M University College of Law
Getting Nowhere: Florida's Failed Choice Of Law Approach To Torts And A Proposal For Change, Shirley A. Wiegand
Florida A & M University Law Review
No abstract provided.
Letting The Perfect Become The Enemy Of The Good: The Relatedness Problem In Personal Jurisdiction,
2012
Brooklyn Law School
Letting The Perfect Become The Enemy Of The Good: The Relatedness Problem In Personal Jurisdiction, Robin Effron
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Derivation Of Positive From Natural Law Revisited,
2012
Notre Dame Law School
Derivation Of Positive From Natural Law Revisited, Santiago Legarre
Journal Articles
Aquinas's account of the relationship of natural law to positive law has a general theory: every just human law is derived from the law of nature; and two, subordinate theorems: derivation is always either per modum conclusionis or per modum determinationis. I will call them sub-theorems. According to the first sub-theorem "something may be derived from the natural law . . . as a conclusion from premises." For example, "that one must not kill may be derived as a conclusion from the principle that one must do harm to no one." For one reason or another, the theory of derivation …
Discretionary (In)Justice: The Exercise Of Discretion In Claims For Asylum,
2012
Barry University
Discretionary (In)Justice: The Exercise Of Discretion In Claims For Asylum, Kate Aschenbrenner Rodriguez
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Creating Diversity Jurisdiction In Removal Actions Through The Improper Use Of Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 21: Procedural Blackjack Or Judicial Bust,
2012
Cleveland State University
Creating Diversity Jurisdiction In Removal Actions Through The Improper Use Of Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 21: Procedural Blackjack Or Judicial Bust, Anthony Andricks
Cleveland State Law Review
Recently, federal district courts have held that Federal Civil Rule of Procedure 21 bestows upon them the power to sever nondiverse parties or claims to create diversity jurisdiction without first finding that a party or claim is improperly joined. Severance may mean that a plaintiff who brings a state court action against multiple parties, one or more of which is not diverse, runs the risk of a federal court severing the action in a removal analysis, even where the plaintiff has committed no improper joinder of parties. Severance may leave a plaintiff with the need to conduct simultaneous suits--one in …
Structuring Jurisdictional Rules And Standards,
2012
Boston University School of Law
Structuring Jurisdictional Rules And Standards, Scott Dodson, Elizabeth Mccuskey
Faculty Scholarship
Jonathan Remy Nash's article, On the Efficient Deployment of Rules and Standards to Define Federal Jurisdiction, bravely tackles and creatively merges-the dual debates over rules versus standards and the ideal contours of federal jurisdiction.' He proposes a revised regime in which rules define jurisdictional boundaries at the front end, while standards "migrate" into a discretionary abstention phase at the back end.2 This realignment, Nash argues, optimizes efficiency and predictability by placing a bright-line rule at the jurisdictional threshold, while promoting federalism by establishing a safety net that applies standards to claims that cross the threshold. 3 In this …
Clarity And Clarification: Grable Federal Questions In The Eyes Of Their Beholders,
2012
Boston University School of Law
Clarity And Clarification: Grable Federal Questions In The Eyes Of Their Beholders, Elizabeth Mccuskey
Faculty Scholarship
Jurists and commentators have repeated for centuries the refrain that jurisdictional rules should be clear.' Behind this mantra is the idea that clearly designed jurisdictional rules should enable trial courts to apply the law more easily and therefore allow litigants to predict more accurately how trial courts will rule.2 The mantra's ultimate goal is efficiency-that trial courts not labor too long on jurisdiction and, most important, that litigants can accurately predict the correct forum and choose to spend their money litigating the merits of their claim, rather than where it will be heard. Jurisdictional clarity largely is devoted …
Clarification Needed: Fixing The Jurisdiction And Venue Clarification Act,
2012
Stanford Law School
Clarification Needed: Fixing The Jurisdiction And Venue Clarification Act, William Baude
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
One hates to seem ungrateful. Judges and scholars frequently call for Congress to fix problems in the law of jurisdiction and procedure, and Congress doesn't usually intervene. In that light, the Jurisdiction and Venue Clarification Act ("JVCA"),[1] signed into law on December 7, 2011, ought to be a welcome improvement. And hopefully, on balance, it will be. But in at least one area that it attempts to clarify, the JVCA leaves much to be desired. Professor Arthur Hellman has called the JVCA "the most far-reaching package of revisions to the Judicial Code since the Judicial Improvements Act of 1990."[2] The …
Attorney General Bradford’S Opinion And The Alien Tort Statute,
2012
Duke Law School
Attorney General Bradford’S Opinion And The Alien Tort Statute, Curtis A. Bradley
Faculty Scholarship
In debates over the scope of the Alien Tort Statute (ATS), one historical document has played an especially prominent role. This document is a short opinion by U.S. Attorney General William Bradford, issued in the summer of 1795, concerning the involvement of U.S. citizens in an attack by a French fleet on a British colony in Sierra Leone. Numerous academic articles, judicial opinions, and litigation briefs have invoked the Bradford opinion, for a variety of propositions, and the opinion was discussed by both sides in the oral argument before the Supreme Court in the first hearing in the pending ATS …
Business Interests And The Long Arm In 2011,
2012
Duke Law School
Business Interests And The Long Arm In 2011, Paul D. Carrington
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
The Bait And Switch: Equitable Estoppel And Mine Safety And Health Administration Jurisdiction,
2012
University of Kentucky
The Bait And Switch: Equitable Estoppel And Mine Safety And Health Administration Jurisdiction, Steven A. Neace
Kentucky Journal of Equine, Agriculture, & Natural Resources Law
No abstract provided.
Using Principles And Policies Of Maritime Arbitration To Guide Responsible Parties In Oil Spill Claims Resolution,
2012
Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law
Using Principles And Policies Of Maritime Arbitration To Guide Responsible Parties In Oil Spill Claims Resolution, Lucy Martucci
Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution
This Note will: 1) provide an introduction to maritime arbitration, 2) discuss an example of a challenged arbitration award in the maritime context, 3) provide a background on OPA 90 and the National Pollution Funds Center ("NPFC"), 4) discuss the claims procedure under OPA 90, 5) discuss an example of a challenged NPFC decision, 6) discuss the problems with the GCCF, and 7) propose amendments to OPA 90. This Note will argue that in order to avoid the complex litigation that ultimately dissolved the GCCF, with the goals of cost efficiency, speed and fairness in mind, amendments to OPA 90 …
Steps To Alleviating Violence Against Women On Tribal Lands,
2012
University of Michigan Law School
Steps To Alleviating Violence Against Women On Tribal Lands, Anjum Unwala
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform Caveat
One in three Native American women has been raped or has experienced an attempted rape. Federal officials also failed to prosecute 75% of the alleged sex crimes against women and children living under tribal authority. The Senate bill to reauthorize the 1994 Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) could provide appropriate recourse for Native American women who are victims of sexual assault. This bill (S. 1925), introduced in 2011, would grant tribal courts the ability to prosecute non-Indians who have sexually assaulted their Native American spouses and domestic partners. Congress has quickly reauthorized the Violence Against Women Act twice before. But …
Ripple Effects: The Unintended Change To Jurisdictional Pleading Standards After Iqbal,
2012
Cleveland State University
Ripple Effects: The Unintended Change To Jurisdictional Pleading Standards After Iqbal, James E. Von Der Heydt
Cleveland State Law Review
This Note describes a little-observed ripple effect of the new pleading standard announced in Iqbal, the antiterrorism case whose holding swept broadly and changed the ground rules for considering allegations in so-called 12(b)(6) motions for all civil cases. This Note examines the interplay between the Twombly/Iqbal doctrine and federal courts’ practical approach to subject-matter jurisdiction. Part II describes the background jurisprudence on subject-matter jurisdiction, including the sharp line the Supreme Court has consistently re-drawn between claims lacking merit and those lacking jurisdictional basis, from Bell v. Hood through Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp. The consistent theme of this jurisprudence …
Flux And Fragmentation In The International Law Of State Jurisdiction: The Synecdochal Example Of Canada’S Domestic Court Conflicts Over Accountability For International Human Rights Violations,
2012
Dalhousie University Schulich School of Law
Flux And Fragmentation In The International Law Of State Jurisdiction: The Synecdochal Example Of Canada’S Domestic Court Conflicts Over Accountability For International Human Rights Violations, Robert Currie, Hugh Kindred
Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press
Any serious exploration of unity and fragmentation in public international law must consider the normative basis of one of the fundamental tools of state action on the international plane: jurisdiction. And no better illustration of the fluctuating application of jurisdiction may be had than to take a national sample – such as Canada – of domestic courts’ struggles to establish accountability for human rights conduct and abuses abroad. The paradigms of the law of jurisdiction, as with the vast corpus of international law, originally responded to the needs of the traditional verities of a legal system based around the state …
Navigating The Borders Between International Commercial Arbitration And U.S. Federal Courts: A Jurisprudential Gps,
2012
Emory University School of Law
Navigating The Borders Between International Commercial Arbitration And U.S. Federal Courts: A Jurisprudential Gps, S. I. Strong
Faculty Articles
Thus, this Article aims to provide newcomers to and infrequent users of international commercial arbitration with a brief introduction to the relationship between international arbitral proceedings and U.S. federal courts. Limitations of space mean that a great deal has necessarily been left out of this discussion. For example, this Article does not describe processes internal to the arbitration, instead focusing solely on the interaction between tribunal, parties and court. Furthermore, the text often skips over basic propositions of U.S. law that are well-established in the domestic realm so as to concentrate more heavily on elements that are unique to international …
You Can't Go Holmes Again,
2012
University of Missouri - Kansas City, School of Law
You Can't Go Holmes Again, Lumen N. Mulligan
Faculty Works
Under the standard interpretation of 28 U.S.C. § 1331, the so called Holmes test, pleading a federal cause of action is sufficient for finding federal question jurisdiction. In January 2012, the Supreme Court, in Mims v. Arrow Financial Services, LLC, recharacterized this standard test for § 1331 jurisdiction as one that considers whether “federal law creates [both] a private right of action and furnishes the substantive rules of decision.” In this first piece to address the Mims Court’s significant change to the § 1331 canon, I applaud its rights-inclusive holding. I contend that this rights-inclusive view rests upon a firmer …
The First Ever (Maybe) Original Jurisdiction Standings,
2012
Boston University School of Law
The First Ever (Maybe) Original Jurisdiction Standings, David Hatton, Jay D. Wexler
Faculty Scholarship
One of the more interesting clauses of the Constitution is the one that gives the Supreme Court original jurisdiction to hear lawsuits brought by one state against another state. These cases have historically made up a consistent, though small, part of the Supreme Court’s docket, but nobody has yet to investigate how the various states have fared in these suits. In this article, we analyze all of the state versus state cases decided over the past 112 years and provide the first ever (we think) official standings of how the states stack up. Minnesota is the big winner.
Sealand, Havenco, And The Rule Of Law,
2012
Cornell Law School
Sealand, Havenco, And The Rule Of Law, James Grimmelmann
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
In 2000, a group of American entrepreneurs moved to a former World War II anti-aircraft platform in the North Sea, seven miles off the British coast, and launched HavenCo, one of the strangest start-ups in Internet history. A former pirate radio broadcaster, Roy Bates, had occupied the platform in the 1960s, moved his family aboard, and declared it to be the sovereign Principality of Sealand. HavenCo's founders were opposed to governmental censorship and control of the Internet; by putting computer servers on Sealand, they planned to create a "data haven" for unpopular speech, safely beyond the reach of any other …
