Hmmmmm.
...Justice Clarence Thomas asked Katyal to explain why corporations weren't obviously liable for their involvement in the enslavement of children. Katyal responded that his clients are merely accused of "aiding and abetting" slavery, for which there is no black letter liability.
Justice Samuel Alito asked Katyal whether a U.S. corporation that "makes a big show of supporting every cause du jour but hires foreign agents to kidnap children and keep them in bondage on a plantation" might be liable when those children, somehow emancipated, grow up and sue in U.S. court. Katyal responded that they would not have redress in an American court under those circumstances because there would be "no domestic injury."...
So Nestle and Cargill only "aid and abet" child slavery. Whassamatta THAT?
No small irony that Clarence Thomas sits on SCOTUS as a slavery case is argued, eh?
No comments:
Post a Comment