Emory International Law Review

Volume 34Issue 4
Comments

An Exception to Jesner: Preventing U.S. Corporations and Their Subsidiaries from Avoiding Liability for Harms Caused Abroad

Luke D. Anderson | 34 Emory Int'l L. Rev. 997 (2020)

After the Supreme Court’s rulings in Jesner and Kiobel, the Alien Tort Statute includes a “presumption against extraterritorial application,” and no suits may be brought against foreign corporate defendants. These barriers limit the ability of victims of human rights violations to find justice. The courts or Congress should create an exception to the Alien Tort Statute for foreign corporate subsidiaries of domestic corporations. This exception will help improve American soft power and will hold human rights violators liable for their crimes. This Comment examines the policies of countries like France, England, Canada, and the Netherlands. The exception proposed by this Comment differs from the policies in these countries because it only asks the U.S. to create an exception for foreign corporations owned by American companies. The U.S. should not protect its corporations and grant them immunity when their subsidiaries engage in egregious human rights violations.

Read More »

Jinping and the Beanstalk: The Tale of Feuding International Giants and How the Planting of Agricultural Tariffs Cultivated a Trade War

Amy Jicha | 34 Emory Int'l L. Rev. 1033 (2020)

The 2018 Trade War between the United States and China debilitated the world economy. In particular, the Trade War crippled the agricultural industry and resulted in irreversible agricultural waste. Both countries should consult the World Trade Organization (WTO) and use the WTO’s dispute resolution process to end the Trade War. In turn, the WTO would likely address the wrongs committed by both countries, the U.S.’s national security defense, China’s usurpation of WTO regulations, and China’s unusual economic structure.

Read More »

A Vision for Future Mobility: Hyperloop One and the Submerged Floating Tunnel from Estonia and Finland

Seongbae Park | 34 Emory Int'l L. Rev. 1067 (2020)

This Comment proceeds in three parts. Part I discusses the three types of forms available for the construction of underwater sea tunnel in Estonia and Finland in detail and explains that Hyperloop One is seeking to utilize the submerged floating tunnel form. Part II explores the existing international conventions, treaties, and regulations related with the Sea that are both compatible and incompatible with Hyperloop One Technology. Part III then argues that the construction of submerged floating tunnel as is, without engineering solutions, is not permitted as it potentially violates existing international legislation and that because of the violation, the interpretation of the existing law should be expanded to include the submerged floating tunnel.

Read More »