Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Jurisdiction
Federalism Limits On Non-Article Iii Adjudication, F. Andrew Hessick
Federalism Limits On Non-Article Iii Adjudication, F. Andrew Hessick
Pepperdine Law Review
Although Article III of the Constitution vests the federal judicial power in the Article III courts, the Supreme Court has created a patchwork of exceptions permitting non-Article III tribunals to adjudicate various disputes. In doing so, the Court has focused on the separation of powers, concluding that these non-Article III adjudications do not unduly infringe on the judicial power of the Article III courts. But separation of powers is not the only consideration relevant to the lawfulness of non-Article III adjudication. Article I adjudications also implicate federalism. Permitting Article I tribunals threatens the role of state courts by expanding federal …
Application Of The Abstention Doctrine To Inverse Condemnation Actions In Federal Court , John T. Harris
Application Of The Abstention Doctrine To Inverse Condemnation Actions In Federal Court , John T. Harris
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
A Muddy Decision - The High Court Fails To Define The Corps' Wetland Jurisdiction In Rapanos V. United States, Jill Lambird
A Muddy Decision - The High Court Fails To Define The Corps' Wetland Jurisdiction In Rapanos V. United States, Jill Lambird
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
No abstract provided.
Aviation Litigation: Federal Preemption And The Creation Of A Federal Remedy As A Means To Extinguish The Current Confusion In The Courts, Deborah J. Olsen
Aviation Litigation: Federal Preemption And The Creation Of A Federal Remedy As A Means To Extinguish The Current Confusion In The Courts, Deborah J. Olsen
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Supreme Court Continues Its Journey Down The Ever Narrowing Paths Of Section 1983 And The Due Process Clause: An Analysis Of Parratt V. Taylor, Robert E. Palmer
The Supreme Court Continues Its Journey Down The Ever Narrowing Paths Of Section 1983 And The Due Process Clause: An Analysis Of Parratt V. Taylor, Robert E. Palmer
Pepperdine Law Review
After nearly a century of quiet slumber, the Supreme Court awoke the sleeping giant. In the past two decades, 42 U.S.C. §1983 has evolved into a judicial Frankenstein monster. Unable to control the beast, the Court has attempted to restrict the creature's movements by unnecessarily limiting its constitutional source. If followed to its logical conclusion, the Court's narrow reading of the Constitution may ultimately demote all due process violations to state tort remedies. This note traces the legislative and judicial evolution of section 1983 as well as the statute's present interaction with the due process clause. The vehicle for this …
Remand: One Constitution, One Standard, Stephen E. Abraham, William M. Hensley
Remand: One Constitution, One Standard, Stephen E. Abraham, William M. Hensley
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Sosa Standard: What Does It Mean For Future Ats Litigation?, Virginia Monken Gomez
The Sosa Standard: What Does It Mean For Future Ats Litigation?, Virginia Monken Gomez
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.