Supreme Court to hear corporate human rights case

[cory777]

Reuters

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Supreme Court will weigh next week whether corporations can be sued in the United States for suspected complicity in human rights abuses abroad, in a case being closely watched by businesses concerned about long and costly litigation.

The high court on Tuesday will consider the reach of a 1789 U.S. law that had been largely dormant until 1980, when human rights lawyers started using it, at first to sue foreign government officials. Then, over the next 20 years, the lawyers used the law to target multinational corporations.

The case before the court pits the Obama administration and human rights advocates against large companies and foreign governments over allegations that Royal Dutch Shell Plc helped Nigeria crush oil exploration protests in the 1990s.

Administration attorneys and lawyers for the plaintiffs contend corporations can be held accountable in U.S. courts for committing or assisting foreign governments in torture, executions or other human rights abuses.

read more - http://news.yahoo.com/supreme-court-hear-corporate-human-rights-case-231247941.html

Breaking Activist News - http://activistnews.blogspot.com/

[Lasher]

1. I'll be shocked if the SCOTUS doesn't rule in favor of corporations.

After all, that pesky law has only been around for 223 years.

[Brettongarcia]

10. Question: do American companies operating in another country, have to honor our laws, there?

Or just local laws?

[Lasher]

12. That is the question at hand, at least in part.

I am no expert but since you asked me, here is my best answer:

US multinationals are subject to laws in America and in the foreign countries where they operate.

Here is a breaking development in the court case mentioned in the OP of this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/101468798

[Brettongarcia]

2. There was unfortunately, strong agreement between Liberal and Conserv. judges: corps are people

Embryos and corporations are people - but you're not. Not until you are a SuperPac.

However, there are ways to work within this frame. If corporations are people, then they have the same rights ... but also responsibilities. They can't pollute their neighbors' yard, and so forth.

To be sure, corporations are "just" people ... with 10,000 arms and legs, spread over 24,000 miles around the world, with trillions of dollars at their disposal. So they are a tough target.

[Volaris]

3. yeah, but now it seems they may be a different KIND of target...

the kind that might be able to have the living hell sued out of them by the ACLU for not treating their fellow "Humans" with actual human decency.

This is definitely one to watch.

[fasttense]

4. Whoever presents the most expensive gifts to Scalia and Thomas will win this case.

I understand that Thomas puts a very high price on his vote but Scalia will give it away for a dinner.

There is no rule of law in the US, not since bush v. Gore. A bunch of pampered unelected partisan hacks control this country, and they are up for sale.

[Hotler]

5. +1 n/t

[morningfog]

6. Just look at those who have filed amicus briefs in support of the respondents.

http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/kiobel-v-royal-dutch-petroleum-et-al/

[raouldukelives]

7. Cool. It'll be interesting to see if the SC allows

Liberty and Justice extended to all of humankind.

[Prophet 451]

8. The SCOTUS will rule 5-4 for the corporations

The majority no longer give a damn about justice or the law.

[morningfog]

9. I think this will go the other way, actually.

[Brettongarcia]

11. Some Justices - Ginsburg especially - are interested in tying US & Corps to international law, here?

The particular case concerns Dutch/Shell Oil, actually hiring mercenary armies/terrorists, to defend its interest in Nigeria in 1990?

This case could be important, as the EU increasing develops international law, courts.

One question: Are US corporations bound to obey local and/or US law, in chaotic overseas environments? Where rule of law, even national boundaries, might not have been firmly established, particularly in revolutions and so forth?

Though? Corporations oversees have long acted like pirates. And owe much of their profits from such actions.

In fact, if this was grandfathered, most international corps would collapse from huge Alien Torts lawsuits.

So this ruling would likely be carefully limited.

But one possible general emerging principle though, seems to be that corporations might be (henceforth?) sued at least in civil court, for gross violations of internationally recognized human rights violations?

???

Or: anybody know what's going on here?