Conflict of Laws
  • About
  • Editorial board
  • Subscription
  • Submission
  • Materials
  • Contact
  • Click to open the search input field Click to open the search input field Search
  • Menu Menu

The United States Gives Plaintiffs in ATS Cases an Early Christmas Present

December 22, 2011/in /by Trey Childress
image_pdfimage_print

By way of brief follow up to the post below, the United States just filed this brief (10-1491tsacUnitedStates) in the Kiobel case in support of petitioners in which the Government argues, among other things, that a corporation can be held liable under federal common law for a violation of the ATS.  This brief is in tension with previous briefs filed by the United States in other ATS cases.  Assuming the United States participates in oral argument, the Justices should have very interesting questions for the Government’s lawyer.

Share this entry
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on X
  • Share on WhatsApp
  • Share on Pinterest
  • Share on LinkedIn
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Share on Vk
  • Share on Reddit
  • Share by Mail
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png 0 0 Trey Childress https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png Trey Childress2011-12-22 19:32:042011-12-23 01:15:48The United States Gives Plaintiffs in ATS Cases an Early Christmas Present

Categories

  • Views
  • News

Most Recent Posts

  • Conflicts of jurisdiction in Senegal: lesson from the Senegalese Supreme Court on Lis Pendens and the Exequatur of foreign judgments July 27, 2026
  • Adoption in the proposal for a European Parenthood Regulation July 21, 2026
  • Copyright, Targeting and Geo-Blocking: The CJEU Stirs the Pot July 15, 2026
  • A Follow-Up: The German Judges Association’s Response to the HCCH Draft Text of a Future Convention on Parallel Proceedings and Related Actions July 15, 2026
  • Private International Law Dimensions of Singapore’s New Legislation to Combat Online Harms July 14, 2026
  • The 1961 HCCH Apostille Convention: Why All African Countries Should Ratify It? — Insights from Judicial Practice in Africa July 14, 2026
  • The enforcement of an advance on costs for substitute performance at the expense of a Russian debtor in German-French legal relations July 2, 2026
  • “Yes, in principle, but not quite there yet…” – Some Observations on the Public Consultation on the HCCH Draft Text of a Future Convention on Parallel Proceedings and Related Actions June 29, 2026
  • Judgment Mobility Rules in India’s Private International Law Regime: No place for a revision au fond? June 26, 2026
  • Nothing to See Here: The CJEU’s Decision in Case C-232/25 Idzinski June 18, 2026
  • Refusal to Enforce in Egypt of a Californian (U.S.) Judgment for Lack of Reciprocity: What Has Gotten into the Egyptian Supreme Court? June 15, 2026
  • PRC Double Interest neither Double nor Penal: Australian Courts Clear Its Name When Enforcing Chinese Judgments June 10, 2026
  • The AIFC Court, Gazprom v Naftogaz and the Emergence of a New Conduit Jurisdiction Debate June 6, 2026
  • Montana Supreme Court Decides International Child Custody Case June 3, 2026
  • China’s Countering Improper Foreign Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Regulation Blocked EU’s Extraterritorial Data Acquisition May 29, 2026
Link to: Issue 2011.3 Nederlands Internationaal Privaatrecht Link to: Issue 2011.3 Nederlands Internationaal Privaatrecht Issue 2011.3 Nederlands Internationaal Privaatrecht Link to: New French Book on International Commercial Law Link to: New French Book on International Commercial Law New French Book on International Commercial Law
Scroll to top Scroll to top Scroll to top