Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Courts As Information Intermediaries: A Case Study Of Sovereign Debt Disputes, Sadie Blanchard
Courts As Information Intermediaries: A Case Study Of Sovereign Debt Disputes, Sadie Blanchard
BYU Law Review
When foreign sovereigns default on their debt, creditors sometimes sue them. These creditors are sophisticated actors, and they know that if they sue, courts can do little to force a sovereign to satisfy a judgment. Why do they sue? This Article argues that these creditors sue because they use litigation to produce information about the debtor state or its government that induces third parties to sanction or refuse to deal with the state or the government. The ability to produce such information strengthens the litigating creditors’ bargaining position in settlement negotiations. Courts thus serve as information intermediaries that strengthen reputational …
Tensions Underlying The Indian Child Welfare Act: Tribal Jurisdiction Over Traditional State Court Family Law Matters, Elizabeth Maclachlan
Tensions Underlying The Indian Child Welfare Act: Tribal Jurisdiction Over Traditional State Court Family Law Matters, Elizabeth Maclachlan
BYU Law Review
State courts have historically exercised jurisdiction over family law cases. However, under the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA), Indian child custody and adoption cases have been taken out of state jurisdiction and placed with Indian tribal governments. State courts have pushed back against proper deference to ICWA and violate ICWA by misapplying its provisions and refusing to transfer custody and adoption cases to tribal courts. This Note analyzes the state-tribal tensions surrounding ICWA and argues that the primary reason for the lack of full state acceptance of ICWA is that, historically, states have had nearly total jurisdiction over family law …
The Federal Circuit's Summary Affirmance Habit, Andrew Hoffman
The Federal Circuit's Summary Affirmance Habit, Andrew Hoffman
BYU Law Review
The Federal Circuit is certainly unique among the circuit courts of appeals. Its exclusive jurisdiction over patents places it in a powerful position. But with that power comes a responsibility to oversee the development of the law. And in the last decade, the court has fallen short of fulfilling this obligation—particularly with regard to clarifying provisions of the America Invents Act. The court has repeatedly disregarded important questions of law by use of Rule 36 summary affirmance. Though other courts of appeals regularly use summary disposition as a means of dealing with burgeoning dockets, the Federal Circuit uses summary affirmance …