<oai_dc:dc xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd"><dc:coverage>United States, Georgia, Clarke County, Athens, 33.96095, -83.37794</dc:coverage><dc:creator>LeClercq, Desiree</dc:creator><dc:date>2021-01-01</dc:date><dc:description>&lt;p&gt;Previously posted on SSRN. (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3943487)&lt;/p&gt;</dc:description><dc:description>United States Supreme Court -- jurisdiction -- forced labor -- child labor -- international human rights -- international labor rights -- international labor organization -- multinational corporations -- global value chains -- Labor and Employment Law -- Supreme Court of the United States</dc:description><dc:description>&lt;p&gt;On June 17, 2021, the United States Supreme Court reversed and remanded a suit filed against Nestlé USA and Cargill under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS) 1 for lack of jurisdiction. This case has already garnered attention over the nature of the dispute (child slaves in Africa), the Supreme Court’s treatment of jurisdiction under the ATS, and the finding shared by five of the nine Supreme Court justices that domestic corporations can potentially be sued under the ATS. This analysis focuses on the child slavery and global supply chain aspects of the decision.&lt;/p&gt;</dc:description><dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format><dc:rights>http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/</dc:rights><dc:subject>Law--History</dc:subject><dc:subject>Law--Study and teaching</dc:subject><dc:subject>Constitutional law</dc:subject><dc:subject>International law</dc:subject><dc:subject>Criminal law</dc:subject><dc:title>Nestlé United States, Inc. v. Doe. 141 S. Ct. 1931 (2021)</dc:title><dc:type>Text</dc:type></oai_dc:dc>