Devas v. Antrix

Devas v. Antrix: Headed back to the Ninth Circuit?

On Monday, the Supreme Court held oral argument in Devas v. Antrix to decide “whether plaintiffs must prove minimum contacts before federal courts may assert personal jurisdiction over foreign states sued under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA).” Minimum contacts between the defendant and the United States might be required as a matter of statutory…

Continue Reading

Foreign States are “Persons”: CC/Devas v. Antrix Amicus Brief

The Supreme Court may soon resolve an important constitutional question: whether foreign states are “persons” entitled to Fifth Amendment due process. For those who engage seriously with the text, history, and structure of the Constitution, there is a ready answer: yes, foreign states are “persons.” The scope of the “process” to which foreign states are…

Continue Reading

CC/Devas (Mauritius) Limited v. Antrix Corp.: International Arbitration and Constitutional Avoidance

I suspect that CC/Devas (Mauritius) Limited v. Antrix Corp. Ltd. caught the eye of the Supreme Court because of an interesting constitutional question: Does the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment apply in civil suits brought against foreign states in U.S. courts? More than thirty years ago, Justice Scalia, writing for a unanimous Court…

Continue Reading

Arbitration Enforcement and Consent

This Term, the Supreme Court will hear a case that could have profound ramifications for international arbitration: CC/Devas (Mauritius) Ltd. v. Antrix Corp. Ltd.  The petitioners are seeking to enforce an arbitration award they won against a state-owned company in India.  The district court enforced the award, relying on the New York Convention and the…

Continue Reading

Ninth Circuit Gets Tangled Up in Minimum Contacts and Due Process

Do the Fifth Amendment’s due process protections require minimum contacts? And do those protections apply to foreign states sued under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA)? Those are the fundamental questions on which Ninth Circuit judges offered differing approaches as they resolved a recent petition for rehearing en banc. Regular TLB readers may recall that…

Continue Reading

Ingrid (Wuerth) Brunk

Vanderbilt Law School
ingrid.wuerth@vanderbilt.eduEmail

William Dodge

George Washington University Law School
william.dodge@law.gwu.eduEmail

Maggie Gardner

Cornell Law School
mgardner@cornell.eduEmail

John F. Coyle

University of North Carolina School of Law
jfcoyle@email.unc.eduEmail

Zachary D. Clopton

Northwestern Pritzker School of Law
zclopton@law.northwestern.eduEmail

Robin Effron

Brooklyn Law School
Bio | Posts

Scott Dodson

UC Law – San Francisco
Bio | Posts

Aaron D. Simowitz

Willamette University College of Law
Bio | Posts

Hannah Buxbaum

Indiana University Maurer School of Law
Bio | Posts

Paul MacMahon

LSE Law School
Bio | Posts

Satjit Singh Chhabra

Khaitan and Co
Bio | Posts

Keshav Somani

Khaitan and Co.
Bio | Posts

Kartikey Mahajan

Khaitan and Co.
Bio | Posts

Paul B. Stephan

University of Virginia School of Law
Bio | Posts

Caroline Spencer

Vanderbilt Law School
Bio | Posts