The Law of Nations in American Law Flashcards
What does the law of nations mean in the United States?
The law of nations more or less includes all the modern sorts of non-treaty rules we examined so far, most notably customary international law, general principles or law, and jus cogens
What are the facts of De Longchamps?
De Longchamps was a French adventurer living in the US who assaulted a French Foreign Minister in Philadelphia (hit him with a cane, called him a bad name)
The French Minister wants Longchamps to be delivered to him to suffer punishment in France as a Frenchman
What is the job of the Pennsylvania court?
They had to find a way to punish Longchamps in the US using US law and US systems of punishment
What does the court finally decide?
The court decides that Longchamps will not be sent to France for punishment, that Pennsylvania has incorporated the law of nations into its law and recognizes that the person of a public minister is sacred and inviolable and that by hurting a minister Longchamps was hurting the common safety and well-being of nations (he is guilty of a crime against the whole world)
The US wanted the world to see that they were capable of handling these types of cases themselves (especially as a young nation)
What is the most important part of Charming Betsy?
➢ An act of Congress ought not to be construed to violate the law of nations if any other possible construction remains and can never be construed to violate neutral rights or affect neutral commerce further than is warranted by the law of nations as understood in this country
What were the facts of Charming Betsy?
An American vessel was taken to St. Thomas where it was sold to Shattuck, a former American who had taken on oath of allegiance to the Danish Crown–>Shattuck sailed the boat to Guadaloupe as a Danish vessel
It was overtaken by French pirates and was subsequently recaptured by an American who then sold the boat and its contents thinking that it was an American ship that was in violation of an American law which forbid commercial intercourse between the US and France
Why didn’t this law apply to Shattuck?
Shattuck had renounced his US citizenship and had actually pledged allegiance to the Danish crown and was therefore no longer under the protection of the US government
The US policy could not be construed to violate international law which did not prohibit Shattuck’s actions–>The act did not intend to include ANY american vessel that had been sold to a neutral
What are the facts of Sosa?
- DEA agent is captured, tortured and killed in Mexico→the US wants Mexico to extradite the doctor who prolonged his life so more torture could happen→Mexico says it wont
- Alvarez is indicted in the US by grand jury→DEA approves plan to hire Mexican nationals to seize Alvarez and bring him to the US for trial
- Alvarez is acquitted and returns to Mexico where he tries to bring a civil case against the US under the Federal Tort Claims Act or the ATS
What is the FCTA and why was Sosa not allowed to bring a claim under it?
➢ FTCA: authorizes suit for personal injury caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission of an employee of the Government while acting within the scope of his office or employment
• FTCA: the FTCA bars all claims based on any injury suffered in a foreign country, regardless of where the tortious act or omission occurred
➢ Here the harm occurred outside the US
What is the ATS? What does it cover?
• ATS: the statute does no more then vest federal courts with jurisdiction, neither creating nor authorizing the courts to recognize any particular right of action without further congressional action
➢ There are 3 areas where the statute was not strictly jurisdictional:
• Piracy, protection of ambassadors and violations of safe conduct
Why didn’t the court want to extend the ATS to Sosa’a claims?
• The prevailing conception of common law counsels restraint in judicially applying internationally generated norms
➢ Court should talk about understanding of the law not create new ones
• Roles of the federal courts have changed, courts look to legislative guidance before exercising innovative authority over substantive law
• Private causes of actions are better left to the legislative judgment in most cases
➢ The consequences from creating these types of actions may create friction in the international arena so the legislative and executive should have discretion to manage foreign affairs
• No congressional mandate to seek out and define new and debatable violations of the law of nations and modern indications of congressional understanding of the judicial role in the field have not affirmatively encouraged greater judicial creativity
What kind of rights must be violated for the ATS to apply?
• The rights infringed must be specific, universal, and obligatory norms
➢ His argument that arbitrary arrest
➢ But arbitrary arrest is not a universally accepted norm, the rule he is arguing for is far too broad
Arbitrary arrest is not considered a jus cogens violation
Should federal courts recognize private claims under Federal common law for violations of international law norms?
• Federal courts should not recognize private claims under federal common law for violations of any international law norm with less definite content and acceptance among civilized nations than the historical paradigms familiar when §1350 was enacted
