Search: Kiobel

In case you missed it, the US Supreme Court ruled on Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum affirming the Second Circuit Court of Appeals’ dismissal. We have an insta-symposium (scroll down to related links to see all posts so far) going on with contributions from many prominent voices. As Roger noted yesterday, if you’d like to post on Kiobel, please contact us. SCOTUS Blog also has a nice roundup. A Pakistani court has ordered the arrest of former president Pervez Musharraf connected to allegations of treason in 2007. North Korea has...

It’s likely old news to most OJ readers, but we should still note in passing that the DC Circuit, in a divided panel, handed down an important ATS case, John Doe VIII v Exxon Mobil Corp. It is noteworthy, among other things, for straight-out rejecting the Second Circuit’s Kiobel ruling, which held that there is no such thing as corporate liability in the ATS. The DC Circuit panel held otherwise. The circuit split is thus sharpened on an issue that was only glancingly mentioned, and not answered, in the Supreme...

One idea that Kiobel has put to rest (at least here in US courts) is the idea that the ATS could be fairly read as a grant of universal civil jurisdiction. On this theory, the ATS could be applied to overseas activities if the nature of the alleged action was so heinous as to rise to the level of a universally proscribable crime (see here for Donald Donovan and Anthea Roberts’ take on this). The Court seemed to take this idea pretty seriously in Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain. At least, Justice...

If you haven’t been able to keep up with all of our posts on Wednesday’s Kiobel decision, An has a great round-up post here . Don’t forget that unsolicited submissions are still welcome for consideration. In other Kiobel news, ASIL has posted Curtis Bradley’s Insight here (.pdf). A judge in the Guatemalan case against former president Efrain Rios Montt has suspended his genocide trial on procedural grounds. Following briefings on the bleak humanitarian situation in Syria, the Security Council managed to find a consensus on a non-binding statement demanding an...

...the courts – on the other hand, even if it does so, the inconsistency with the Bush administration may undermine the deference accorded the government. Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Scalia made exactly that point in the Kiobel oral argument (at 43-45) and the issue is discussed in more detail in my forthcoming article The Supreme Court and the Alien Tort Statute: Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum. In any event, the article mentioned above, Pinochet’s Legacy Reassessed, 106 AJIL 731 (2012), analyzes a large number of cases often cited to...

...that “moving from the abstractions of [human rights] instruments to operational rules is … automatic.” Nor do I suggest that “WTO dispute resolution [is] the first place [to] look when considering China’s evolution.” Rather I argue that trade law has the potential to help liberalize not just the movement of goods, but also information. He complains that I don’t cite Kiobel, by which he means the Second Circuit decision in that case (holding that corporations cannot be sued for human rights violations under the Alien Tort Statute), not the Supreme...

Last week the Ninth Circuit issued a controversial opinion in Mujica v. Airscan, Inc., that sharply limits the scope of human rights litigation. The claims in Mujica arose in Colombia and allegedly implicate corporate collusion with the Colombian military. Following Kiobel the common consensus was that Alien Tort Statute litigation would be severely curtailed based on the presumption against extraterritoriality. Not surprisingly, the Ninth Circuit rejected the Plaintiffs’ claims, finding that where the only connection to the United States was the Defendants’ nationality, the claims do not “touch and concern”...

[Doug Cassel is an Emeritus Professor of Law at Notre Dame Law School.] The unanimous jurisdictional ruling of the United Kingdom Supreme Court in Vedanta Resources PLC and another v Lungowe and others , issued April 10, is the most important judicial decision in the field of business and human rights since the jurisdictional ruling of the United States Supreme Court in Kiobel v Royal Dutch Petroleum in 2013.  But the difference between the two cases is night and day: whereas Kiobel drastically curtailed the jurisdiction of US courts, Vedanta...

...and President Yanukovich’s crackdown on protesters; a recent TED Talk by Benjamin Bratton that got him thinking that we international lawyers can learn a lot from technologists (and vice versa); and China’s crackdown of Uighurs, by highlighting the case of Ilham Tohti. Duncan brought our attention to the unveiling of AJIL’s new blog: AJIL Unbound (a heartfelt welcome to the blogosphere!). We had four guest posts this week, two covering some of Roger’s posted thoughts on extraterritoriality in Kiobel and two on the effectivity of international criminal courts. In the...

This week many of our readers will have attended ASIL’s 106th Annual Meeting. If you weren’t in Washington DC, we brought you Harold Hongju Koh’s statement regarding Syria (with the possibility to comment here). Deborah Pearlstein drew conclusions for further research from the panel on international humanitarian law and international human rights law. Via ASIL Cables, you could also read Joanne Mariner’s summary of the 2012 Grotius Lecture and Tai-Heng Cheng’s interview with James Crawford. In the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision in Kiobel to reopen the argument on...

Columbia University historian Samuel Moyn has a tough post up on the Foreign Affairs website on Kiobel and the arc of the Alien Tort Statute, which he sees as having served the narrow constituency of us rather than being true to the historical origins of human rights: The ATS has been a boon for U.S. law schools, in which students rightly interested in saving the world have been taught to view the statute as an all-powerful tool. But the popularity of the law might have led them to neglect the...

...respond. Finally, on Wednesday, Odette Murray, David Kinley, and Chip Pitts will discuss ‘Exaggerated Rumours of the Death of an Alien Tort? Corporations, Human Rights and the Remarkable Case of Kiobel‘. Of particular timeliness given recent developments, Murray, Kinley and Pitts analyse the legal and political ramifications of the Kiobel decision, and in their discussion update their article in light of the decision in Sarei v Rio Tinto and the recent grant of certiorari in the US Supreme Court. Justine Nolan of the University of New South Wales will respond....