This Comment argues that, contrary to the Amerada Hess ruling, the FSIA is the sole means of obtaining jurisdiction over a foreign soverign. Part I discusses the Amerada Hess decision. Part II examines the FSIA and the ATS and how they have been judicially interpreted. Finally, Part III concludes the Amerada Hess decision is incorrect and suggests and alternate interpretation of the FSIA and the ATS.
Foreign Soverign Immunity After Amerada Hess Shipping Corp. v. Argentine Republic: Did It Go Down with the Hercules?,
11 Fordham Int'l L.J. 660
Available at: http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ilj/vol11/iss3/8