Comments on: Crime and Punishement?

By: Dr. Bombay

Dr. Bombay — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 18:05:08 +0000

I did read it. First, I don’t know how persuasive I find the common law argument given that there a statutory scheme “saving for suitors” the right to sue in state court under 28 U.S.C. § 1333. Now I’m aware that this requires the states to apply maritime law under the “reverse Erie Doctrine,” but nothing that I can see requires that they apply traditional penalty schemes while doing so.

Second, where’s the outrage over the court overstepping the sovereignty of the citizens of Alaska here? The have an elected legislator that established the law, a function court system that followed the law, and a jury decided the case within that law. What’s the problem? If the retreat to the position of States Right is so alluring, shouldn’t individual states be allowed to punish corporate transgressor as they would individual citizens?

By: Mojo

Mojo — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 17:14:05 +0000

In terms of the Louisiana case, this is a classic example of Dr. Bombay’s favorite justices once again coming to the conclusion that they know better than everyone else and should go ahead and legislate accordingly. In other words, judicial review spinning wildly out of control…

As for the Exxon case, Big Show is right. Theres some bizarre maritime rule that they invoked. Its utterly ridiculous, seeing as though the purpose of punitive damages is to punish the wrongdoer and $500 million is mere chump change to Exxon.

I’d also like to note that the Ninth Circuit sat on this case for four years before issuing its initial decision. The original trial for this case concluded sometime in the mid 90s. Shouldn’t having to go through 15 years of appeals somehow violate notions of due process?

By: BigShow

BigShow — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 15:47:31 +0000

Go read the Exxon case. There’s been a long history of maritime common law that limited punitive damages for the negligent actions of a vessel operator on the vessel owner.