Disaster in the Amazon: Dodging Boomerang Suits in Transnational Human Rights Litigation

Disaster in the Amazon: Dodging Boomerang Suits in Transnational Human Rights Litigation


Over the past two decades, the number of lawsuits filed against multinational corporate entities for environmental degradation and human rights abuses has skyrocketed. At the same time, U.S. courts have shown an increasing reluctance to hear such cases, turning to the common-law doctrine forum non conveniens (FNC) as a basis for dismissal. FNC dismissals usually mandate that corporate defendants submit to jurisdiction in the courts of the nation or nations where the alleged injuries occurred. While defendants often voluntarily agree to such stipulations, a disturbing practice has emerged in recent years: so-called boomerang litigation. Strengthened by procedural reforms, judiciaries abroad have proved both capable of entertaining complex environmental and human rights suits and willing to hold multinational businesses accountable. As a result, defendants have begun to mount challenges to the legitimacy of the very proceedings they assiduously lobbied for in the first place, challenges often brought in the same court that initially granted dismissal. These “boomerang suits” risk inconsistent results, create the possibility of substantial delay, and, depending on the claims at issue, threaten to magnify catastrophic harms to human rights and the environment. Using the infamous Aguinda v. Texaco and its progeny Republic of Ecuador v. ChevronTexaco as a case study, this Comment will propose a simple, though novel, solution: if a matter has been dismissed once on forum non conveniens grounds, subsequent courts must do everything in their power to ensure that foreign continuations go smoothly, including upending parallel litigation so that all claims stemming from the same “nucleus of operative fact” can be resolved in a single forum. This is particularly true when the stakes are not merely large sums of money, but the wellbeing of entire communities. To do otherwise sets the stage for manipulation and circumvention of judicial systems abroad. Further, even if businesses are ultimately held accountable, complications entailed by multiple international proceedings and appeals may, in the context of human rights and the environment, result in increased loss of life.

PDF

More in this Issue

Rational Ignorance, Rational Closed-Mindedness, and Modern Economic Formalism in Contract Law

This article argues that modern economic formalism is nothing more than an argument for purportedly rational ignorance and closed-mindedness in courts. Although individuals may well be ignorant in many circumstances, courts ordinarily should not strive to be. The article first describes why rational ignorance and (to coin a phrase) “rational closed-mindedness” in individuals fail to […]

Lessons from Punjab’s Missing Girls: Toward a Global Feminist Perspective on Choice in Abortion

Finding Instruction from Punjab’s “Missing Girls”: Towards a Global Feminist Perspective on “Choice” in Abortion employs the current phenomenon of sex-selective abortions in Punjab (India) to call for a re-evaluation of the concept of “choice” as it pertains to women’s reproductive freedom. It is hoped that this case study of sex selection in Punjab will […]

Ideology and Exceptionalism in Intellectual Property: En Empirical Study

This article investigates the relationship between ideology and judicial decision-making in the context of intellectual property. Using data drawn from Supreme Court intellectual property cases decided in between 1954 and 2006, the authors show that ideology is a significant determinant of cases involving intellectual property rights: the more conservative a judge is, the more likely […]

A Tale of Two Lochners: The Untold History of Substantive Due Process and the Idea of Fundamental Rights

This article challenges the standard narrative of the Lochner era by challenging one of its most basic assumptions: that the idea of right existing at the beginning of the twentieth century was the modern notion of right-as-trump. Precisely the opposite view prevailed during the first two decades of the century: rights could easily be trumped […]

Out of the Shadows: Preventive Detention, Suspected Terrorists, and War

Unlike many other developed (and developing) nations, the United States does not have a statute authorizing preventive detention without charges. U.S. law has no formal statutory mechanism by which such a person could be detained. Some have suggested that this is a potentially profound defect in our national security armature. Indeed, had a rational preventive […]

Yellow by Law

Over the past decade, scholars have paid increasing attention to Japanese-American constitutional history. For the most part, this literature focuses on the government’s decision during World War II to intern people of Japanese ancestry. But the trope of the Japanese as perpetual foreigners predates internment. My aim in this Article is to explore another historical […]