Cornell Law Review

Note

Domesticating Comity: Territorial U.S. Discovery in Violation of Foreign Privacy Laws

Corby F. Burger

This Note aims to make two contributions. First, this Note addresses a series of threshold descriptive and normative questions that are mostly unaddressed by scholars, the Restatements of Foreign Relations Law, and the courts: Is the doctrine of foreign-state compulsion available to defend against a territorial discovery order or is the foreign-state compulsion defense limited to extraterritorial acts? How have courts applied the doctrine to territorial discovery, if at all? Should the foreign-state compulsion defense be territorially limited? Second, if the foreign-state compulsion defense is available to defend against a territorial discovery order, how do courts account for the fact that the information is presently located in the United States when applying the doctrine? Should courts account for the present location of ESI, and, if so, how much weight should the present location of data be given in a court’s analysis?

Jan 2020

Conditionality and Constitutional Change

Felix B. Chang. Professor, University of Cincinnati College of Law. E-mail: felix.chang@uc.edu. For a fuller treatment of this topic, see FELIX B. CHANG & SUNNIE RUCKER-CHANG, ROMA RIGHTS AND CIVIL RIGHTS: A TRANSATLANTIC COMPARISON (2020).

The burgeoning field of Critical Romani Studies explores the persistent subjugation of Europe’s largest minority: the Roma. Within this field, it has become fashionable to draw parallels to the U.S. Civil Rights Movement.11. See generally James A. Goldston, The Unfulfilled Promise of Educational Opportunity in the United States and Europe: From Brown v. Board to D.H. and Beyond, in REALIZING ROMA RIGHTS 163–84 (Jacqueline Bhabha et…

Jan 2020