28 U.S.C. § 4102 — Recognition of foreign defamation judgments
submitted 16 years ago by Pub. L. 111-223 to r/title-28-JUDICIARY-AND-JUDICIAL-PROCEDURE · 558 words · no verdicts yet
A domestic court may recognize or enforce a foreign defamation judgment only if the foreign law and court jurisdiction meet specified United States constitutional standards. Extra protections apply when the judgment is against an interactive computer service provider.
(a) First Amendment considerations.
(1) In general. Despite any Federal or State* law, a domestic court* may not recognize or enforce a foreign defamation* judgment unless it finds either—
(A) the foreign defamation law gave speech and press at least as much protection in that case as the First Amendment and the constitution and law of the State where the domestic court sits; or
(B) even if it gave less protection, the party opposing recognition or enforcement would have been found liable for defamation by a domestic court applying those same United States protections.
(2) Burden. The party seeking recognition or enforcement must prove the showing required by (A) or (B).
(b) Jurisdictional considerations.
(1) A domestic court may not recognize or enforce a foreign defamation judgment unless it finds that the foreign court’s personal jurisdiction met the due-process requirements imposed on United States domestic courts by the Constitution.
(2) The party seeking recognition or enforcement must prove that the foreign court’s personal jurisdiction met those requirements.
(c) Judgment against provider of interactive computer service.
(1) A domestic court may not recognize or enforce a foreign defamation judgment against an interactive computer service provider, as defined in section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934, unless it finds that the judgment would be consistent with section 230 if the information had been provided in the United States.
(2) The party seeking recognition or enforcement must prove that consistency.
(d) Appearances not a bar. Appearing in the foreign court* does not take away a party’s right to oppose recognition or enforcement under this section and does not waive jurisdictional claims.
(e) Rule of construction. This section does not—
(1) affect enforcement of a foreign judgment* other than one for defamation; or
(2) limit section 230’s application to defamation claims.
This section does not define “interactive computer service.”
Notwithstanding any other provision of Federal or State* law, a domestic court* shall not recognize or enforce a foreign judgment* for defamation* unless the domestic court determines that—
the defamation law applied in the foreign court’s adjudication provided at least as much protection for freedom of speech and press in that case as would be provided by the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States and by the constitution and law of the State in which the domestic court is located; or
even if the defamation law applied in the foreign court’s adjudication did not provide as much protection for freedom of speech and press as the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States and the constitution and law of the State, the party opposing recognition or enforcement of that foreign judgment would have been found liable for defamation by a domestic court applying the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States and the constitution and law of the State in which the domestic court is located.
The party seeking recognition or enforcement of the foreign judgment shall bear the burden of making the showings required under subparagraph (A) or (B).
Notwithstanding any other provision of Federal or State law, a domestic court shall not recognize or enforce a foreign judgment for defamation unless the domestic court determines that the exercise of personal jurisdiction by the foreign court* comported with the due process requirements that are imposed on domestic courts by the Constitution of the United States.
The party seeking recognition or enforcement of the foreign judgment shall bear the burden of making the showing that the foreign court’s exercise of personal jurisdiction comported with the due process requirements that are imposed on domestic courts by the Constitution of the United States.
Notwithstanding any other provision of Federal or State law, a domestic court shall not recognize or enforce a foreign judgment for defamation against the provider of an interactive computer service, as defined in section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 230) unless the domestic court determines that the judgment would be consistent with section 230 if the information that is the subject of such judgment had been provided in the United States.
The party seeking recognition or enforcement of the foreign judgment shall bear the burden of establishing that the judgment is consistent with section 230.
An appearance by a party in a foreign court rendering a foreign judgment to which this section applies shall not deprive such party of the right to oppose the recognition or enforcement of the judgment under this section, or represent a waiver of any jurisdictional claims.
Nothing in this section shall be construed to—
affect the enforceability of any foreign judgment other than a foreign judgment for defamation; or
limit the applicability of section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 230) to causes of action for defamation.
Source credit: (Added Pub. L. 111–223, § 3(a), Aug. 10, 2010, 124 Stat. 2381.)
- 2010Enacted · Pub. L. 111-223 · 124 Stat. 2381
A history note hasn’t been published yet. The record shows enactment by Pub. L. 111-223 on 2010-08-10.
all 0 arguments · sorted by: best
no arguments yet — make the first case