Order ID 53563633773 Type Essay Writer Level Masters Style APA Sources/References 4 Perfect Number of Pages to Order 5-10 Pages Description/Paper Instructions
Case Brief
Boyang Zhang
I-Bus-415 Law of International Trade
Scott Bergstedt
2020/9/20Case Brief
Title and Citation
El Al Israel Airlines, Ltd. V. Tseng, 525 U.S. 155 (1999) U.S. Supreme Court
Facts
The plaintiff/respondent boarded a flight from New York to Tel Aviv. The security officers of El Al Airlines did an invasive security examination on her. She filed a matter before a state court in New York seeking damages. Among others, she wanted damages for assault by the security officers and false imprisonment. She did not however state that she had gained any physical injuries as a result of the alleged physical containment and assault. El Al then transferred the case to the Federal District Court which terminated the matter based on the Warsaw Convention. The plaintiff/respondent then appealed to the Second Circuit appeals court that reversed the District Court’s decision by stating that as the court Convention did not cover psychopathic and psychological injuries under Article 17, the national law was appropriate in resolving such issues. EL Al appealed to the Supreme Court.
Issues
The issue the Supreme Court sought to determine was whether the Warsaw Convention meant that passengers of international airlines could not pursue compensation under international law.
Decision
Justice Ginsburg write the majority opinion and was joined by Chief Justice Rehnquist and associate justices O’Connor, Scalia, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas, and Breyer. The Supreme Court decided that the Warsaw Convention was the applicable law. Despite the failure of the Warsaw Convention to cover the circumstances presented before the court, the national law was not appropriate for the application.
Reasoning
Justice Ginsburg writing for the majority opinion stated that it is doubtful if the various delegates who negotiated the Convention meant to have different rules for the various nations. The construction of the Convention to allow the recovery of damages under local law would produce legal anomalies not envisaged by the Convention.Separate Opinions
Justice Stevens delivered the dissenting opinion. Holding in favor of Tseng, Stevens noted that treaty construction should be akin to federal legislation in that it should not pre-empt state law unless there is a clear intent in the treaty to do so.
Analysis
The case is significant in that it lays down the supremacy of treaties that the US is a party to over domestic law. The case elucidates that in areas where the US has entered into a treaty, both federal and domestic law will not apply.
Title and Citation
Transpacific Steel LLC v. United States Et Al, 19-00009, (Ct. Int’l Trade 2020)
Facts
The Plaintiff, Transpacific Steel LLC which is an American importer of steel sought to recover a refund from the US government tariffs that it had paid after the US President had proclaimed Executive Order no. 9772. The proclamation had increased the tariff on steel imported from the Republic of Turkey from 25% to 50%. The plaintiff’s argument was premised on their assertion that Proclamation 9772 lacked any connection to national security. It thus sought the court’s decisions that the Proclamation fraughted the constitution as it failed to affirm the doctrine of equal protection under the law.
Issues
The main issue before the court was whether by issuing Proclamation no. 9772 of August 10, 2018, the government had violated statutory law and the constitution.
Decision
The court decided that Proclamation 9772 that imposed additional § 232 duties to steel that companies imported from Turkey violated the procedures that espoused in both the constitution and the law. As a consequence, the Proclamation violated both the animating legislation and the Constitution. As a consequence, the legislation was null and void. Justice Jane A Restani wrote the opinion and her colleagues Claire R Kelly and Garry S Katzman.
Reasoning
The court noted that in cases where a plaintiff approaches a court for redress due to unequal treatment by the government, the court will seek to see if there is a legitimate government purpose behind the disparity. There was no legitimate government purpose behind the Proclamation as the government could not illustrate any national security issues behind the disparity in the treatment of companies that imported steel from Turkey and those that imported from elsewhere. Moreover, the court’s decision was further based on the fact that the legislation grants the court the jurisdiction to review the President’s action under section 232 to see if there has been a misconstruction, violation of the procedure, or acting outside the authority the governing legislation grants. Having found the President acted in contravention of the Constitution and the law, the court had to outlaw the Proclamation.
Separate Opinions
The majority opinion was the only opinion the court issued with all the three judges agreeing. There was no concurring opinion with a different rationale. There was no dissenting opinion either.
Analysis
By holding that the Executive at large and the President, in particular, could not treat companies differently, the court affirmed the concept of equal treatment applies to corporate bodies as well as people. Moreover, it was important for the court to uphold that that the doctrine that even in cases where the government affirms national security concerns in issuing of executive orders, it has to conform to the procedure the legislation lays down or its actions will be illegal, null, and void. The importance of such a proclamation by the court lies on the basis that in some cases, governments’ actions based on national security can be arbitrary and lack a legal basis.
Subsequent court decisions
On appeal, the government sought a stay of enforcement of the judgment as it sought to appeal the decision of the Court before the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The court denied the government’s pray for stay as the defendants did not convince the court it could succeed on merits after the appeal and the balance of harm weighed against granting a stay.
RUBRIC
QUALITY OF RESPONSE NO RESPONSE POOR / UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD EXCELLENT Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. 30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. 40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. 50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. 5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. 10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. 15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. 20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors 10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors 15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. 20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. 5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper 7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. 10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper. GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
CLICK ON THE LINK HERE: https://www.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME] and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!!