Oregon Review of International Law : Volume 21 (2020)

Permanent URI for this collection

https://hdl.handle.net/1794/25388

Browse

Browsing Oregon Review of International Law : Volume 21 (2020) by Subject "Business law"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    International Enforcement Cooperation in Cases of Cross-Border Market Misconduct in View of Regulatory Gaps and Overlaps
    (University of Oregon School of Law, 2020-07-01) Yamamoto, Masamichi
    An increase in cross-border securities transactions has resulted in a heightened need for international cooperation. Many issues, however, may arise when multiple securities regulators simultaneously try to enforce their securities regulations. This Article focuses on one of these issues, regulatory overlaps and gaps, and proposes how securities regulators change the current cooperation framework.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Legal Impediments to Banking Services for Recreational Cannabusinesses: Comparing Oregon to Canada
    (University of Oregon School of Law, 2020-07-01) Daigle, Suzanne K.
    Recreational cannabis’s recent spike in popularity necessitates cannabis law reform, especially in regard to cannabis banking services—in both the United States and Canada. Canada’s legalization of recreational cannabis could help inspire cannabis law reform at the federal level in the United States, thereby increasing cannabis business (cannabusiness) owners’ access to reliable banking options in both countries. This Article examines how the legal, regulatory framework for providing banking services for cannabusinesses in Oregon and Canada prevents legitimate cannabusinesses from thriving and suggests future possibilities for improving the existing framework.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    U.S. Corporate Liability Under the Alien Tort Statute After Jesner v. Arab Bank, PLC
    (University of Oregon School of Law, 2020-07-01) Song, Doori C.
    Global corporations breathed a sigh of relief when the United States Supreme Court held in Jesner v. Arab Bank, PLC, that foreign corporations could not be defendants in suits brought under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS). The Jesner Court’s decision, however, did not determine whether domestic corporations may be namable defendants in ATS cases. Whether victims of human rights violations can initiate ATS suits against U.S. corporations is now a question of much debate. This Article argues that U.S. corporations should be namable defendants in ATS lawsuits because such litigation (1) is consistent with the text, purpose, and history of the ATS; (2) involves enough of a domestic nexus to overcome the presumption against extraterritoriality; (3) would not substantially endanger U.S. foreign relations; and (4) would be consistent with several circuit court decisions that recognize U.S. corporations as ATS defendants under the theory of civil aiding and abetting.
©2020 University of Oregon School of Law