Throwback Thursday: The Human Rights of Foreign Sailors
Litigation in U.S. courts involving gross misconduct committed outside the United States by non-U.S. actors did not begin with the revival of the Alien Tort Statute in the 1980s. In the earlier era of global trade that centered around maritime commerce, U.S. admiralty courts at times remedied—often with moral outrage—wrongs committed on the high seas….
Continue ReadingSection 230 and the Presumption Against Extraterritoriality
The Ninth Circuit opinion in Gonzalez v. Google (2021) raises important questions about how the presumption against extraterritoriality applies to immunity defenses invoked by social media companies under 47 U.S.C. § 230.Section 230 shields internet companies from civil liability for user-generated content hosted on their platforms. Gonzalezholds, effectively, that there is no conceivable application of…
Continue ReadingA Primer on Human Rights Litigation
Modern human rights law developed in response to the events of the World War II, although it has earlier precursors. In 1948, the U.N. General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, a non-binding declaration. More than seventy human rights treaties followed, including the Genocide Convention, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,…
Continue ReadingThe ATS Clarification Act Can Protect Human Rights and Level the Playing Field for U.S. Businesses
As previously reported on TLB, Senators Durbin (D-IL) and Brown (D-OH) recently introduced the Alien Tort Statute Clarification Act (ATSCA), which, if passed, will clarify the extraterritorial reach of the Alien Tort Statute (ATS) and expand the statute’s jurisdiction to cover all defendants “present in” the United States. The ATS is one of our nation’s…
Continue ReadingKashef v. BNP Paribas SA Overcomes the Forum Non Conveniens Hurdle
In Kashef v. BNP Paribas SA, Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein in the Southern District of New York recently denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss for forum non conveniens. The order allows plaintiffs to continue to pursue their claims against BNP Paribas S.A. and its U.S.-based subsidiary and New York branch (“BNPP”) for their role in…
Continue ReadingCourt Holds that ATS Claims for Medical Experimentation Are Not Impermissibly Extraterritorial
In a recent decision, Estate of Alvarez v. The Johns Hopkins University, a federal district court held that claims under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS) based on nonconsensual medical experiments in Guatemala were not impermissibly extraterritorial. Although the district court ultimately granted summary judgment for the defendants on other grounds, the decision is significant because…
Continue ReadingCriminal Proceedings and the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act
Congress enacted the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 (FSIA) to address the inconsistent application of doctrines of state immunity to civil suits against foreign states and state-owned enterprises. The statute confers jurisdictional immunity on these entities, subject to enumerated exceptions. Most litigation under the FSIA involves whether a particular defendant qualifies as a foreign…
Continue ReadingJam v. IFC: Secondary Liability in Transnational Disputes
Later this month, the U.S. Supreme Court will consider a petition for a writ of certiorari in Jam v. International Finance Corp., a case that raises important questions about United States jurisdiction over cross-border disputes. The case most immediately involves the scope of sovereign immunity where a foreign state or international organization takes actions in the United States that contribute to tortious conduct overseas. But the case also has broader implications for secondary liability generally.
Continue ReadingCustomary International Law’s Domestic Status: Reflections After Twenty-Five Years
We are grateful to Bill Dodge for highlighting our 1997 article on the domestic legal status of customary international law. In that article, we critically analyzed what we referred to as the “modern position,” which is the claim made by some academics and the Restatement (Third) of Foreign Relations Law that customary international law has…
Continue ReadingThrowback 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 Reading