Throwback Thursday: Revisiting Bradley and Goldsmith’s “Critique of the Modern Position”
Twenty-five years ago, Professors Curtis Bradley and Jack Goldsmith shook the fields of transnational litigation, federal courts, and foreign relations law by questioning the conventional wisdom that customary international law has the status of federal common law. Their article Customary International Law as Federal Common Law: A Critique of the Modern Position, published in the…
Continue ReadingOral Argument in ZF Automotive Generates More Confusion Than Clarity on the Availability of U.S. Discovery for Use in International Arbitration
Last week, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in two consolidated cases asking whether U.S.-style discovery under 28 U.S.C. § 1782 is available for use in, respectively, international commercial arbitration and investor-state arbitration. These questions stem from a statutory ambiguity that has caused widespread uncertainty in international arbitration, and it may not be resolvable based on statutory interpretation or congressional intent.
Continue ReadingWhytock Challenges the Conventional Wisdom that Transnational Forum Shopping Is Increasing in U.S. Courts
In a recent article, Professor Chris Whytock challenges the claim that transnational forum shopping by foreign plaintiffs is increasing. Using data on approximately 8 million civil actions filed in federal court, Whytock shows that transnational diversity cases represent a small and decreasing percentage of overall litigation.
Continue ReadingForeign Dictators in U.S. Courts
From Augusto Pinochet to Jiang Zemin and Ferdinand Marcos, foreign dictators have for decades faced a range of claims in U.S. courts. But there is also a line of cases in U.S. courts involving dictators as plaintiffs. Over the last decade, authoritarian governments from China, Russia, Turkey, and Venezuela have used the U.S. judicial system to file frivolous claims against political opponents. And these claims appear to be mainly a harassment technique against dissidents and media outlets based in the United States.
Continue ReadingS.D.N.Y. Holds Consent-Based Personal Jurisdiction over the PLO Unconstitutional
The Southern District of New York recently held in Fuld v. Palestine Liberation Organization that a federal statute subjecting the Palestine Liberation Organization (“PLO”) to personal jurisdiction violates the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. The case adds to a growing list of important due process questions in transnational litigation.
Continue ReadingWhy Transnational Litigation?
The justiciability of Holocaust expropriation claims; treaty interpretation in international custody disputes; the adequacy of pleading the enslavement of children; accessing U.S. discovery for international arbitration; the availability of punitive damages for international terrorism; the immunity of international organizations before U.S. courts; how to serve process on a foreign state: The U.S. Supreme Court has…
Continue ReadingA Primer on Choice-of-Law Clauses
A choice-of-law clause is a contract provision that selects the law to govern the contract and claims relating to the contract.
Continue ReadingA Primer on Forum Selection Clauses
A forum selection clause is a contractual provision that selects a specific court to resolve disputes. When suit is filed in a court that is not the chosen forum, the clause may provide a basis for dismissal or transfer. When suit is filed in the chosen forum, the clause may provide a basis for the…
Continue ReadingA Primer on the Act of State Doctrine
The act of state doctrine is a federal common law doctrine providing that courts in the United States will not question the validity of an official act of a recognized foreign government fully performed within its own territory. The doctrine is often applied in cases like Banco Nacional de Cuba v. Sabbatino (1964) to require…
Continue ReadingA Primer on Foreign Judgments
In the United States, the recognition and enforcement of foreign-country judgments is generally governed by state law. Nevertheless, the law on foreign judgments is fairly uniform throughout the United States because most states have adopted one of two Uniform Acts. These Acts establish a presumption that final, conclusive, and enforceable foreign judgments are entitled to…
Continue Reading