Law Commons^™

The Case For Preempting State Money Transmission Laws For Crypto-Based Businesses, Carol R. Goforth

Arkansas Law Review

Few industries are evolving as rapidly or as dramatically as those involving payment systems. The recent advent and spread of cryptocurrencies and associated trading platforms and exchanges, as well as ongoing improvements and innovations in FinTech generally, ensure that this is going to continue for the foreseeable future. Along with this rapid change has come a dynamic increase in the number and range of payment startups, a development that has been recognized as likely to redound to the benefit of consumers and the broader economy. The problem is simply that regulation is not keeping up with innovation.

Law School News: Fall 2020 Reopening: The Faq 07-09-2020, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

A Balanced Consideration Of The Federal Circuit’S Choice-Of-Law Rule, Jennifer E. Sturiale

Utah Law Review

The Federal Circuit’s jurisdiction is unique. Unlike the jurisdiction of all other U.S. courts of appeals, the Federal Circuit’s jurisdiction is defined not by its geographical boundaries, but rather by the subject matter of the original claims and compulsory counterclaims. The court has appellate jurisdiction over final decisions from all U.S. district courts if a plaintiff’s claim or a party’s counterclaim arises under the patent laws. From this unusual jurisdictional grant, the Federal Circuit has concluded that, as a policy matter, it should apply and develop its own law only if the legal issue ...

Law Library Blog (March 2020): Legal Beagle's Blog Archive, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Law Library Newsletters/Blog

No abstract provided.

Innovating Federalism In The Life Sciences, Myrisha S. Lewis

Faculty Publications

This Article challenges the view that the US. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has exclusive Jurisdiction over life sciences innovations. Many current and forthcoming life sciences innovations are "innovative therapies" such as gene editing, gene therapy, and regenerative stem cell treatments, which are actually "hybrids" of state and federal Jurisdiction. Thus, both state and federal Jurisdiction coexist: federal Jurisdiction exists to the extent that these medical innovations use drugs or biologics, but state Jurisdiction exists to the extent that these innovations are procedures regulated by states as the practice of medicine.

This Article argues that the regulation of numerous current ...

Equity In American And Jewish Law, Itzchak E. Kornfeld , Ph.D.

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Keeping Faith With Nomos, Steven L. Winter

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Don't Go In The Water: On Pathological Jurisdiction Splitting, Jamison E. Colburn

Journal Articles

Waters and water rights have endured (or induced) a uniquely pathological tendency in our tradition to split up the authority to declare the operative legal interests therein. By studying three seemingly unrelated areas of waters and water rights law, this tendency is brought out in its essence and linked to explicit foundations and likely causes. Ultimately, this kind of extreme jurisdiction splitting is rendering our waters ungovernable, forcing even the most basic legal questions to go undecided. The last part of the article introduces three different reform pathways but cautions against the search for quick fixes of any kind.

The Need For A Central Panel Approach To Administrative Adjudication: Pros, Cons, And Selected Practices, Malcolm C. Rich, Alison C. Goldstein

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

The goal of this report is to document the growth of the central panel movement that has now emerged in a majority of states. This research is designed to provide data-informed recommendations to states and municipalities considering the adoption of a central panel system or the enlargement of the jurisdiction encompassed by an existing central panel as well as to states considering the adoption of a more final decision-making authority for their central panel ALJs. The work is also intended to inform the debate over whether the central panel approach is something that the federal government should consider. This research ...

Law Symposium: Adjudicating Sexual Misconduct On Campus: Title Ix And Due Process In Uncertain Times, Roger Williams University School Of Law, Michael M. Bowden

School of Law Conferences, Lectures & Events

No abstract provided.

Snapback, Version 2.0: The Best Solution To The Problem Of Snap Removal, Arthur D. Hellman

Testimony

The forum defendant rule, embodied in 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b)(2), prohibits removal of civil actions based on diversity of citizenship jurisdiction “if any of the parties in interest properly joined and served as defendants is a citizen of the State in which such action is brought.” Pointing to the phrase “properly joined and served,” defendants have argued that § 1441(b)(2) does not bar removal of a diversity action if a citizen of the forum state has been joined as a defendant but has not yet been served. The stratagem of removing before service to avoid the ...

Snapback! A Narrowly Tailored Legislative Solution To The Problem Of Snap Removal, Arthur D. Hellman

Testimony

“Snap removal” is a stratagem used by defendants in civil litigation as an end run around the forum defendant rule. That rule, embodied in 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b)(2), prohibits removal of civil actions based on diversity of citizenship jurisdiction “if any of the parties in interest properly joined and served as defendants is a citizen of the State in which such action is brought.” Focusing on the phrase “properly joined and served,” defendants have argued that § 1441(b)(2) allows removal of a diversity action when a citizen of the forum state has been joined as a ...

Law School News: Inside Rwu Law's Small 'Admiralty Empire' 10-18-2019, Michael M. Bowden

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

French Jurisdictional Complexity On The Fringe— Acadia 1667-1710, Jacques Vanderlinden

Journal of Civil Law Studies

During the second half of the 17th century of French formally institutionalized colonial power in Acadia, the province was in an interesting state of jurisdictional complexity insofar as French colonists were concerned. While native Amerindians, mostly Malecites and Micmawqs, carried their precolonial political order and jurisdictional organisation without almost any interference of the colonial power, imported normative systems derived from feudalism, the Catholic Church, French colonial order, French provincial customs and family organisation were juxtaposed and interacted, each of them were a well-known part of the Western legal tradition. Yet—and this is the most interesting—the state power, which ...

Pereira's Aftershocks, Lonny Hoffman

William & Mary Law Review

At the end of the 2017 term, the Supreme Court decided not to stop time. Nonpermanent residents who have been placed in removal proceedings may apply for a discretionary form of relief from the Attorney General known as “cancellation of removal.” To be eligible, an applicant must show (in addition to meeting other requirements) that she has been in the United States for at least ten consecutive years. The period of continuous physical presence is interrupted when the government serves the noncitizen with a notice to appear at a removal hearing. However, in Pereira v. Sessions, the Court held that ...

Out Of The Quandary: Personal Jurisdiction Over Absent Class Member Claims Explained, A. Benjamin Spencer

Faculty Publications

Since the Supreme Court's decision in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, San Francisco County, litigants and lower courts have wrestled with the issue of whether a federal court must be able to exercise personal jurisdiction with respect to each of the claims asserted by absent class members in a class action and, if so, what standard governs that jurisdictional determination. This issue is rapidly coming to a head and is poised for inevitable resolution by the Supreme Court in the near future; multiple circuit courts have heard appeals from district courts that have reached varying conclusions ...

Government Standing And The Fallacy Of Institutional Injury, Tara Leigh Grove

Tara L. Grove

A new brand of plaintiff has come to federal court. In cases involving the Affordable Care Act, the Defense of Marriage Act, and partisan gerrymandering, government institutions have brought suit to redress “institutional injuries”—that is, claims of harm to their constitutional powers or duties. Jurists and scholars are increasingly enthusiastic about these lawsuits, arguing (for example) that the Senate should have standing to protect its power to ratify treaties; that the House of Representatives may sue to preserve its role in the appropriations process; and that the President may go to court to vindicate his Article II prerogatives. This ...

The Dark Side Of Territoriality, Timothy Zick

Timothy Zick

No abstract provided.

Exercising Environmental Human Rights And Remedies In The United Nations System, Linda A. Malone, Scott Pasternack

Linda A. Malone

No abstract provided.

An Organizational Account Of State Standing, Katherine Mims Crocker

Katherine Mims Crocker

Again and again in regard to recent high-profile disputes, the legal community has tied itself in knots over questions about when state plaintiffs should have standing to sue in federal court, especially in cases where they seek to sue federal-government defendants. Lawsuits challenging everything from the Bush administration’s environmental policies to the Obama administration’s immigration actions to the Trump administration’s travel bans have become mired in tricky and technical questions about whether state plaintiffs belonged in federal court.

Should state standing cause so much controversy and confusion? This Essay argues that state plaintiffs are far more like ...

Erie, Swift, And Legal Positivism, Michael S. Green

Michael S. Green

No abstract provided.

Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

No abstract provided.

One Good Plaintiff Is Not Enough, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

This Article concerns an aspect of Article III standing that has played a role in many of the highest-profile controversies of recent years, including litigation over the Affordable Care Act, immigration policy, and climate change. Although the federal courts constantly emphasize the importance of ensuring that only proper plaintiffs invoke the federal judicial power, the Supreme Court and other federal courts have developed a significant exception to the usual requirement of standing. This exception holds that a court entertaining a multiple-plaintiff case may dispense with inquiring into the standing of each plaintiff as long as the court finds that one ...

Abstention Doctrine, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

No abstract provided.

When Torts Met Civil Procedure: A Curricular Coupling, Laura G. Dooley, Brigham A. Fordham, Ann E. Woodley

Laura Dooley

Law students must become adept at understanding how various bodies of law interact-supporting, balancing, and even conflicting with each other. This article describes an attempt to achieve these goals by merging two canonical first-year courses, civil procedure and torts, into an integrated class titled ‘Introduction to Civil Litigation’. Our most pressing motivation was concern that students who study civil procedure and torts in isolation develop a skewed, unrealistic view of how law works in the real world. By combining these courses, we hoped to teach students early in their careers to approach problems more like practicing lawyers, who must deal ...

Federal Jurisdiction For Above-Ground Oil Storage Tanks: A Practical Analysis For Navigating Federal Regulations, Kathryn Hussong

St. Mary's Law Journal

Clear, consistent, and concise jurisdictional boundaries will aid pipeline operators to determine which regulations apply to their operations and associated facilities. This will help alleviate legal and financial risk to pipeline operators, who may be liable for noncompliance regardless of whether the pipeline operator or the associated refinery commits the violation. Overlapping state and federal regulations of pipelines and refineries has created confusion amongst operators regarding what regulations apply to their facilities. Three federal agencies—the Pipeline and Hazardous Safety Administration (PHMSA), the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) respectively—and a myriad of state ...

The Territorial Reach Of Federal Courts, A. Benjamin Spencer

Faculty Publications

Federal courts exercise the sovereign authority of the United States when they assert personal jurisdiction over a defendant. As components of the national sovereign, federal courts' maximum territorial reach is determined by the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause, which permits jurisdiction over persons with sufficient minimum contacts with the United States and over property located therein. Why, then, are federal courts limited to the territorial reach of the states in which they sit when they exercise personal jurisdiction in most cases? There is no constitutional or statutory mandate that so constrains the federal judicial reach. Rather, it is by ...

Backlash Against International Courts In West, East And Southern Africa: Causes And Consequences, Karen J. Alter, James T. Gathii, Laurence R. Helfer

James T Gathii

This paper discusses three credible attempts by African governments to restrict the jurisdiction of three similarly-situated sub-regional courts in response to politically controversial rulings. In West Africa, when the ECOWAS Court upheld allegations of torture by opposition journalists in the Gambia, that country’s political leaders sought to restrict the Court’s power to review human rights complaints. The other member states ultimately defeated the Gambia’s proposal. In East Africa, Kenya failed in its efforts to eliminate the EACJ and to remove some of its judges after a decision challenging an election to a sub-regional legislature. However, the member ...

Categorical Confusion In Personal Jurisdiction Law, Todd Peterson

Washington and Lee Law Review

In Part I, the Article discusses the history of the U.S. Supreme Court’s substantive due process limitations on personal jurisdiction and, in particular, the standards for corporate-activities-based jurisdiction before the Court’s recent cases on that issue. Part II discusses the Court’s failure to provide a convincing theoretical justification for imposing substantive due process limitations on personal jurisdiction. It also discusses the consequences of that failure in three doctrinal areas of personal jurisdiction law, the traditional basis of service on an individual in the forum state, specific jurisdiction and corporate-activities-based jurisdiction. Part III then analyzes in detail ...

Impartial Hearings Under The Idea: Legal Issues And Answers, Perry A. Zirkel

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.