Can Defendants Be Sued at Home? Forum Non Conveniens, Expendable Lives, and the Legacy of Gore v. U.S. Steel Corp.
Many were shocked last month when court documents revealed that Johnson & Johnson tested the safety of its talc powder in the 1960s by injecting asbestos into mostly Black inmates at Philadelphia’s Holmesburg prison. The use of Holmesburg inmates for medical studies was already well-documented, echoing the U.S. Government’s syphilis studies in hundreds of Black…
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- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4