Oral Argument Recap: Fuld v. PLO
On Tuesday, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Fuld v. Palestine Liberation Organization. The question presented is whether the Promoting Security and Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act of 2019 (PSJVTA) violates the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause by declaring that the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and the Palestinian Authority (PA) have consented to…
Continue ReadingFuld v. PLO: Argument Day!
Today, the Supreme Court is hearing oral argument in Fuld v. Palestinian Liberation Organization. The petition asks whether the Promoting Security and Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act of 2019 (PSJVTA) violates the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause by declaring that the PLO has consented to personal jurisdiction based on specified conduct. TLB’s prior coverage…
Continue ReadingFuld Preview: Professor Briefs
Next week, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Fuld v. Palestinian Liberation Organization. Fuld raises two interrelated issues: (1) Does the Promoting Security and Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act (PSJVTA) provide consent-based personal jurisdiction consistent with Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co.?; and (2) What are the differences (if any) between the…
Continue ReadingFuld Preview: AALS Panel on Mallory and More
Next week, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Fuld v. Palestinian Liberation Organization. TLB’s prior coverage of Fuld can be found here. Among the key issues in Fuld is whether the Promoting Security and Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act’s scheme for consent-based personal jurisdiction is constitutional. In 2023, the Supreme Court decided…
Continue ReadingDevas 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 ReadingForeign 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 ReadingAll I Want for Christmas (Forum Selection Clause Edition)
As the holidays approach, TLB editors have prepared lists of things that they wish courts in the United States would do differently on the subject of transnational litigation. In this post, I revisit one of my favorite subjects—forum selection clauses—to identify some reforms that would make my Christmas exceptionally merry. 1. Stop Asserting Personal Jurisdiction…
Continue ReadingArbitration 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 ReadingSupreme Court Grants Cert in Fuld v. PLO
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Fuld v. Palestinian Liberation Organization to decide whether the Promoting Security and Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act (PSJVTA) violates the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment. For prior TLB coverage of Fuld, see here, here, here, here, and here. The PSJVTA purports to establish personal…
Continue ReadingPersonal Jurisdiction and the Montreal Convention
I recently discussed the Fifth Circuit’s remarkably unremarkable personal jurisdiction analysis in a case involving a Montreal Convention claim. Before reaching the constitutional personal jurisdiction analysis, however, the panel in Hardy v. Scandinavian Airlines System first rejected the plaintiff’s argument that the Montreal Convention itself established personal jurisdiction over the defendant airline, either directly or…
Continue Reading