The founders of the United States recognized the desirability of providing aliens access to the federal courts and they expressly granted aliens the right to have their cases heard in the federal courts when they drafted the Constitution. As the Constitution in Art III, § 2 put it: "The judicial power shall extend . . . to Controversies . . . between a State, or the Cit izens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects." In explaining why federal subject matter jurisdiction should extend to cases involving aliens, Alexander Hamilton reasoned “an unjust sentence against a foreigner … would … if unredressed, be an aggression upon his sovereign, as well as one which violated the stipulations in a treaty or the general laws of nations.” At the same time, disputes involving aliens were thought likely to involve legal and other issues of national importance, which federal courts were deemed best able to decide.”
Although there are few records of the Constitutional Convention relating to the subject of the judiciary, it is generally accepted that the decision to establish a federal forum for cases involving aliens arose from two related concerns. The first concern was that state and local judges were likely to be swayed by local prejudices against foreigners and that aliens would therefore have difficulty obtaining a fair trial in state or local courts. The second, and perhaps more compelling, concern was that foreign nations might take offense if the affairs of their citizens in the United States were not treated at the national level. Allowing aliens access to the federal courts in which the judges were not accountable to the local citizenry appeared to be the best way of overcoming these problems.
Inhaltsverzeichnis (Table of Contents)
- A. Introduction and Historical Background
- B. International Forum Selection Agreements
- I. Exclusive and Nonexclusive Forum Selection Agreements
- II. Reasons for Choice of Forum Clauses
- III. Relation between Choice of Forum and Choice of Law Clauses
- IV. Development and Enforceability of Choice of Forum Clauses
- V. Forum Non Conveniens
- i. Historic Approach
- ii. Modern Approach
- a. Forum Non Conveniens and Forum Selection Clauses and their application in 'The Bremen v. Zapata Off-Shore Co.'
- b. Forum Selection Clause and its Enforcement in 'Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc. v. Shute'; the aftermath of 'The Bremen v. Zapata Off-Shore Co.'
- C. Access to Federal Courts under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a) for Foreign Corporations or ‘The Question of Stateless Corporations’
Zielsetzung und Themenschwerpunkte (Objectives and Key Themes)
This paper examines the constitutional origins of alienage jurisdiction, focusing on the history of its application and the development of international forum selection agreements. It explores the reasons for the establishment of federal courts for cases involving aliens, and the significance of forum non conveniens and its application in specific legal cases.
- The historical development of alienage jurisdiction and its constitutional basis
- The use and enforceability of international forum selection agreements
- The concept of forum non conveniens and its role in international litigation
- The access of foreign corporations, specifically stateless corporations, to federal courts under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)
- The interplay between forum selection clauses, choice of law clauses, and the application of different legal jurisdictions
Zusammenfassung der Kapitel (Chapter Summaries)
The first chapter provides a historical background of alienage jurisdiction, explaining its origins within the framework of the Constitution. The paper explores the motivations behind granting aliens access to federal courts, highlighting concerns about prejudice and the importance of upholding international relations.
The second chapter delves into international forum selection agreements, outlining the distinction between exclusive and nonexclusive clauses. It further explores the various reasons for parties to enter into such agreements, ranging from convenience and familiarity with their home courts to cost minimization and dispute resolution.
The third chapter examines the relationship between forum selection clauses and choice of law clauses, emphasizing that they are not necessarily interchangeable. It highlights the possibility of adjudicating disputes in one forum while applying the laws of another.
The fourth chapter delves into the historical development and enforceability of forum selection agreements, tracing the evolution of their legal acceptance and highlighting the ongoing debate about their enforceability.
The fifth chapter focuses on the doctrine of forum non conveniens and its application in international litigation, examining historical and modern approaches to its implementation. It analyzes key cases like ‘The Bremen v. Zapata Off-Shore Co.’ and ‘Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc. v. Shute’, illustrating the evolving role of forum non conveniens in relation to forum selection clauses.
The sixth chapter investigates the accessibility of federal courts under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a) for foreign corporations, with particular attention to ‘stateless corporations’. This chapter analyzes the historical context, legal precedents, and the challenges posed by the existence of stateless corporations in international litigation.
Schlüsselwörter (Keywords)
Alienage jurisdiction, international forum selection agreements, forum non conveniens, choice of law clauses, 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a), stateless corporations, international business transactions, federal courts, constitutional law, judicial power, diversity jurisdiction.
- Citation du texte
- Ass. Iur., LL.M. Jord Hollenberg (Auteur), 2004, Alienage Jurisdiction of US-Federal Courts, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/41008
