Law Commons^™

Jurisdiction And "Definitional Law", John F. Preis

Law Faculty Publications

Professor Scott Dodson and I agree that the law of federal jurisdiction needs improvement. We disagree, however, on Congress’s power to make that happen. In an article published in 2017, Dodson argued that “jurisdiction” has an “inherent identity” that “[n]either Congress nor the courts can change.” In an article published the following year, I critiqued this claim. There, I argued that Congress is not obliged to respect jurisdiction’s inherent identity (to the extent it might have one). Rather, Congress need only respect the identity of jurisdiction contained in the United States Constitution. Professor Dodson recently published a rejoinder to my …

Ferc’S Expansive Authority To Transform The Electric Grid, Joel B. Eisen

Law Faculty Publications

Using an unprecedented historical analysis of over 100 years of law dating to the Progressive Era, this Article concludes that the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”) v. Electric Power Supply Association properly asserted that FERC has ample authority to pursue broad environmental and energy goals in transforming the electric grid. Building on the Court’s finding that FERC may regulate “practices” that “directly affect” rates in wholesale electricity markets, the analysis develops a detailed standard that is consistent with interpretation of regulatory statutes in each of three distinct eras: the Progressive Era, the era of regulation …

Ferc V. Epsa And The Path To A Cleaner Electricity Sector, Joel B. Eisen

Law Faculty Publications

This article analyzes the impact of FERC v. Electric Power Supply Association, in which the Supreme Court upheld FERC’s demand response rule (Order 745) and confirmed FERC’s authority over “practices” “directly affecting” wholesale rates for electricity. It contends that the Supreme Court made a definitive pronouncement on FERC’s authority over end users of electricity who also provide resources back to the electric grid. It also contends that FERC v. EPSA marks the end of “dual federalism” in electricity law that treated federal and state jurisdiction as separate and distinct spheres of authority. Instead, it posits a new era of concurrent …

A Further Note On Federal Causes Of Action, John F. Preis

Law Faculty Publications

In the article, I argue that federal causes of action ought to be treated as (1) distinct from substantive rights, (2) synonymous with the availability of a remedy (but not whether a remedy will in fact issue) and (3) distinct from subject matter jurisdiction (unless Congress instructs otherwise). This thesis is built principally on a historical recounting of the cause of action from eighteenth century England to twenty-first century America. In taking an historical approach, I did not mean to argue that federal courts are bound to adhere to centuries-old conceptions of the cause of action. I merely used history …

How The Federal Cause Of Action Relates To Rights, Remedies, And Jurisdiction, John F. Preis

Law Faculty Publications

Time and again, the U.S. Supreme Court has declared that the federal cause of action is "analytically distinct" from rights, remedies, and jurisdiction. Yet, just pages away in the U.S. Reports are other cases in which rights, remedies, and jurisdiction all hinge on the existence of a cause of action. What, then, is the proper relationship between these concepts?

The goal of this Article is to articulate that relationship. This Article traces the history of the cause of action from eighteenth-century England to its modem usage in the federal courts. This history demonstrates that the federal cause of action is …

The Ghost That Slayed The Mandate, Kevin C. Walsh

Law Faculty Publications

Virginia v. Sebelius is a federal lawsuit in which Virginia has challenged President Obama's signature legislative initiative of health care reform. Virginia has sought declaratory and injunctive relief to vindicate a state statute declaring that no Virginia resident shall be required to buy health insurance. To defend this state law from the preemptive effect of federal law, Virginia has contended that the federal legislation's individual mandate to buy health insurance is unconstitutional. Virginia's lawsuit has been one of the most closely followed and politically salient federal cases in recent times. Yet the very features of the case that have contributed …

Health Care: Why Jurisdiction Matters, Kevin C. Walsh

Law Faculty Publications

Congress’s enactment of comprehensive healthcare reform legislation last year was the culmination of one round of an intense debate that continues today. The second round began the same day that the first round ended, when President Obama signed the legislation. In this second round, the locus of debate has shifted from Congress to the courts, which are processing a slew of lawsuits filed immediately after enactment.

One of the most prominent is Virginia v. Sebelius. The lawsuit presents on its face a prominent and critically important question of federalism: Did Congress exceed the limits of its enumerated legislative powers by …

Cumulative Supplement To Jurisdiction In Civil Action, Wendy Collins Perdue

Law Faculty Publications

Cumulative supplement to Jurisdiction in Civil Action Third Edition.

Jurisdiction And Discretion In Hybrid Law Cases, John F. Preis

Law Faculty Publications

An everlasting debate in the federal courts field is which branch of the federal government has the power to control federal jurisdiction. While some commentators and judges assert that the judiciary has the implicit authority to refine the boundaries of its jurisdiction, others argue that Article III vests that authority with Congress only and judicial modification of jurisdiction is illegitimate. In focusing almost entirely on the constitutional legitimacy of the question, this debate has overlooked an important consideration: Even if the judiciary may legitimately wield discretion in setting its jurisdiction, is such discretion functionally appropriate?

This Article argues that such …

Tribal-State Affairs: American States As 'Disclaiming' Sovereigns, David E. Wilkins

Jepson School of Leadership Studies articles, book chapters and other publications

The history of tribal-state political relations has been contentious from the beginning of the republic. As a result of these tensions, the relationship of tribal nations and the federal government was federalized when the U.S. Constitution was ratified in 1788. Thus, a number of states, especially in the West, were required in their organic acts and constitutions to forever disclaim jurisdiction over Indian property and persons. This article analyzes these disclaimer clauses, explains the factors that have enabled the states to assume some jurisdictional presence in Indian Country, examines the key issues in which disclaimers continue to carry significant weight, …

Breaking Into The Intergovernmental Matrix: The Lumbee Tribe's Efforts To Secure Federal Acknowledgment, David E. Wilkins

Jepson School of Leadership Studies articles, book chapters and other publications

This article discusses the concept of political recognition (both federal and state) of Indian tribes; explains the difference between administrative and legislative recognition; examines who is or should be empowered to extend federal recognition, the Congress or the executive branch; discusses the major factors that have compelled the Lumbees to seek federal recognition when they were already acknowledged by the state; and examines the major factors that have precluded them from securing complete federal recognition.

Annual Survey Of Virginia Law - Civil Procedure And Practice, William Hamilton Bryson

Law Faculty Publications

This article considers recent statutes and case law in the field of Virginia civil procedure and practice. Since it has been several years since the last similar effort was published, this essay will take notice of the developments which have taken place from 1983 to May 1985. Much of the case law to be mentioned is pre-1983 trial court material, but since it was only recently published, it will be useful to have it included here. This is especially so since most points of civil procedure and practice, being harmless error, are not often considered by the Virginia Supreme Court …

The Equity Side Of The Exchequer: Its Jurisdiction, Administration, Procedures, And Records, William Hamilton Bryson

Law Faculty Publications

The equity side of the court of exchequer "is by far the most obscure of all the English jurisdiction," declared Plucknett. The purpose of this essay is to shed some light upon this court and to explore its jurisdiction, to introduce its staff, to discover its procedures, to explain its equity records, and perhaps to render Plucknett's statement obsolete.