About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

Case Citations [1] (July 2019 - April 2020)

handle is hein.ali/resfrlus0046 and id is 1 raw text is: FOREIGN RELATIONS LAW OF THE UNITED STATES 2D PART I. JURISDICTION CHAPTER 4. IMMUNITIES FROM JURISDICTION TOPIC 2. IMMUNITIES OF FOREIGN STATE § 66. Applicability of Immunity of Foreign State C.A.9, 2019. Subsec. (f) quot. in disc. Family members of deceased American citizen brought a lawsuit against former Israeli Defense Minister, alleging, inter alia, that defendant violated federal statutes against torture and extrajudicial killings when, during a military operation directed by defendant, Israeli military forces boarded a ship approaching an Israeli naval blockade and killed ship passengers, including decedent. The district court granted defendant's motion to dismiss. This court affirmed, holding, inter alia, that defendant was entitled to foreign sovereign immunity, because, under Restatement Second of Foreign Relations Law § 66(f), asserting jurisdiction over foreign officials who were performing acts within their official capacity was akin to enforcing a rule of law against a state. Dogan v. Barak, 932 F.3d 888, 893-894. PART III. INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS CHAPTER 3. EFFECT OF INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS TOPIC 2. LAW OF THE UNITED STATES § 141. Effect of Treaty as Domestic Law C.A.4, 2019. Com. (f) quot. in case quot. in sup. Canadian taxpayer sued the United States, seeking a refund of taxes that were collected from him by the Internal Revenue Service on behalf of Canada pursuant to a treaty between the United States and Canada, on the ground that the treaty was unconstitutional. The district court granted defendant's motion to dismiss. Affirming, this court held, among other things, that the treaty did not violate the Taxing Clause of the Constitution, because the Taxing Power was not an exclusive grant of power to Congress. The court cited Restatement Second of Foreign Relations Law § 141 in explaining that the mere fact that a congressional power existed did not meant that the power was exclusive so as to preclude the making of a self-executing treaty within the area of that power. Retfalvi v. United States, 930 F.3d 600, 609. COPYRIGHT 02020 By THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most