kaal:claim:1664809-006

Regardless of how the Supreme Court rules in Morrison v. NAB, Congress could overrule the holding, because the question presented is one of statutory construction and Congress may amend a statute whose interpretation it dislikes.

Source quote, verbatim

Congress could overrule the holding in that case because this is

From

Richard W. Painter, Wulf A. Kaal, Extraterritorial Application of US Securities Law – Will the US Become the Default Jurisdiction for (2010), 3. CONGRESS MAY SUBJECT NON-US SECURITIES TRANSACTIONS TO US SECURITIES LITIGATION, p. 2
https://ssrn.com/abstract=1664809 · source PDF

Cite as

Richard W. Painter, Wulf A. Kaal, Extraterritorial Application of US Securities Law – Will the US Become the Default Jurisdiction for (2010). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1664809

Holds when

holdings that rest on statutory interpretation rather than constitutional grounds

Classification

mechanismsupport: arguedsecurities-law

Verify

The quote above is an exact substring of the source PDF, whose sha256 is 2d5c8c30f969f8eb613bfa1fe6888a7cfa1a452e1027bcda0489618ceac62c20. Extraction method: pdf-text-layer.
Attestation record: colloquium/attestations/bd42009e7ffc6137...json
Verify the binding yourself: curl -s https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/1664809-006.md | sha256sum