Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Courts (79)
- Constitutional Law (31)
- Civil Procedure (28)
- Litigation (20)
- Supreme Court of the United States (16)
-
- Judges (15)
- Legislation (14)
- Jurisprudence (11)
- State and Local Government Law (11)
- Legal History (10)
- Administrative Law (9)
- Indigenous, Indian, and Aboriginal Law (7)
- Physical Sciences and Mathematics (7)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (7)
- Law and Politics (6)
- Law and Society (6)
- Legal Remedies (6)
- Human Rights Law (5)
- Public Law and Legal Theory (5)
- American Politics (4)
- Applied Statistics (4)
- Common Law (4)
- Criminal Law (4)
- Environmental Law (4)
- International Law (4)
- Legal Profession (4)
- Legal Studies (4)
- Political Science (4)
- Institution
-
- University of Michigan Law School (26)
- University of Colorado Law School (15)
- Selected Works (9)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (8)
- University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law (4)
-
- Cornell University Law School (3)
- University of Oklahoma College of Law (3)
- University of Pittsburgh School of Law (3)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (3)
- Emory University School of Law (2)
- Georgetown University Law Center (2)
- SelectedWorks (2)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (2)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (2)
- William & Mary Law School (2)
- BLR (1)
- Barry University School of Law (1)
- Boston University School of Law (1)
- Brooklyn Law School (1)
- Chicago-Kent College of Law (1)
- Florida International University College of Law (1)
- Florida State University College of Law (1)
- New York Law School (1)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (1)
- Notre Dame Law School (1)
- Pepperdine University (1)
- The Peter A. Allard School of Law (1)
- University of Cincinnati College of Law (1)
- University of Kentucky (1)
- Valparaiso University (1)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Michigan Law Review (12)
- Publications (12)
- Articles (7)
- Articles by Maurer Faculty (7)
- Donald J. Kochan (4)
-
- Faculty Works (4)
- Cornell Law Faculty Publications (3)
- Faculty Scholarship (3)
- Kevin M. Clermont (3)
- University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform (3)
- American Indian Law Review (2)
- Faculty Articles (2)
- Faculty Publications (2)
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (2)
- Touro Law Review (2)
- Vanderbilt Law Review (2)
- Washington and Lee Law Review (2)
- All Faculty Publications (1)
- Anthony J. Bellia (1)
- Articles & Chapters (1)
- Brooklyn Law Review (1)
- Chicago-Kent Law Review (1)
- Continuing Legal Education Materials (1)
- ExpressO (1)
- FIU Law Review (1)
- Faculty Articles and Other Publications (1)
- Indiana Law Journal (1)
- Journal Articles (1)
- Law Faculty Publications (1)
- Lumen N. Mulligan (1)
- Publication Type
- File Type
Articles 31 - 60 of 102
Full-Text Articles in Jurisdiction
A Crisis In Federal Habeas Law, Eve Brensike Primus
A Crisis In Federal Habeas Law, Eve Brensike Primus
Reviews
Everyone recognizes that federal habeas doctrine is a mess. Despite repeated calls for reform, federal judges continue to waste countless hours reviewing habeas petitions only to dismiss the vast majority of them on procedural grounds. Broad change is necessary, but to be effective, such change must be animated by an overarching theory that explains when federal courts should exercise habeas jurisdiction. In Habeas for the Twenty-First Century: Uses, Abuses, and the Future of the Great Writ, Professors Nancy King and Joseph Hoffmann offer such a theory. Drawing on history, current practice, and empirical data, King and Hoffmann find unifying themes …
The Constitutionality Of Federal Jurisdiction-Stripping Legislation And The History Of State Judicial Selection And Tenure, Brian T. Fitzpatrick
The Constitutionality Of Federal Jurisdiction-Stripping Legislation And The History Of State Judicial Selection And Tenure, Brian T. Fitzpatrick
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
Few questions in the field of Federal Courts have captivated scholars like the question of whether Congress can simultaneously divest both lower federal courts and the U.S. Supreme Court of jurisdiction to hear federal constitutional claims and thereby leave those claims to be litigated in state courts alone. Such a divestiture is known today as “jurisdiction stripping,” and, despite literally decades of scholarship on the subject, scholars have largely been unable to reconcile two widely held views: jurisdiction stripping should be unconstitutional because it deprives constitutional rights of adjudication by independent judges and jurisdiction stripping is nonetheless perfectly consistent with …
Article Iii And Removal Jurisdiction: The Demise Of The Complete Diversity Rule And A Proposed Return To Minimal Diversity, Rodney K. Miller
Article Iii And Removal Jurisdiction: The Demise Of The Complete Diversity Rule And A Proposed Return To Minimal Diversity, Rodney K. Miller
Oklahoma Law Review
The complete diversity rule is broken. Although easily applied in theory (federal courts can exercise subject matter jurisdiction over an action on diversity grounds only when no party is of the same citizenship as any adverse party), over time the number of judicially and legislatively created exceptions to the rule, as well as their varying and inconsistent application by the federal courts, has created an environment in which similarly situated parties are treated differently based solely on the forum in which the litigation is brought. In the removal context, depending upon the forum in which an action is filed, a …
The Timeliness Of Removal And Multiple-Defendant Lawsuits, Paul Lund
The Timeliness Of Removal And Multiple-Defendant Lawsuits, Paul Lund
Paul Lund
Although the procedure for removing cases from state to federal court has existed for nearly 225 years, removal remains one of the most controversial aspects of federal jurisdictional law. Each year, more than 30,000 civil cases are removed from state to federal court, and many of those cases involve more than one defendant. One of the most frequently litigated issues in these cases has involved when the notice of removal must be filed. Prior to a recent amendment, the statute governing removal, 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b), required that a notice of removal be filed within thirty days of service on …
The Judicial Power And The Inferior Federal Courts: Exploring The Constitutional Vesting Thesis, A. Benjamin Spencer
The Judicial Power And The Inferior Federal Courts: Exploring The Constitutional Vesting Thesis, A. Benjamin Spencer
Faculty Publications
Although the Constitution vests the "Judicial Power" of the United States in the Supreme Court and in any inferior courts that Congress establishes, both Congress and the Court have long propounded the traditional view that the inferior courts may be deprived cognizance of some of the cases and controversies that fall within that power. Is this view fully consonant with the history and text of Article III? One possible reading of those sources suggests that the Constitution vests the full Judicial Power of the United States in the inferior federal courts, directly extending to them jurisdiction over matters that Congress …
A Realist Defense Of The Alien Tort Statute, Robert Knowles
A Realist Defense Of The Alien Tort Statute, Robert Knowles
Law Faculty Publications
This Article offers a new justification for modern litigation under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS), a provision from the 1789 Judiciary Act that permits victims of human rights violations anywhere in the world to sue tortfeasors in U.S. courts. The ATS, moribund for nearly 200 years, has recently emerged as an important but controversial tool for the enforcement of human rights norms. “Realist” critics contend that ATS litigation exasperates U.S. allies and rivals, weakens efforts to combat terrorism, and threatens U.S. sovereignty by importing into our jurisprudence undemocratic international law norms. Defenders of the statute, largely because they do not …
Clear Rules - Not Necessarily Simple Or Accessible Ones, Lumen N. Mulligan
Clear Rules - Not Necessarily Simple Or Accessible Ones, Lumen N. Mulligan
Faculty Works
In The Complexity of Jurisdictional Clarity, 97 VA. L. REV. 1 (2011), Professor Dodson argues that the traditional call for clear and simple rules über alles in subject matter jurisdiction is misplaced. In this response essay, I begin by arguing that Dodson, while offering many valuable insights, does not adequately distinguish between the separate notions of simplicity, clarity, and accessibility. Second, I note that crafting a clarity enhancing rule, even if complex and inaccessible, may be a more promising endeavor than the search for a regime that is at once clear, simple and accessible. In the third section, I contend …
Jurisdiction By Cross-Reference, Lumen N. Mulligan
Jurisdiction By Cross-Reference, Lumen N. Mulligan
Faculty Works
State and federal law often cross-reference each other to provide a rule of decision. The difficulties attendant to these cross-referenced schemes are brought to the fore most clearly when a federal court must determine whether such bodies of law create federal question jurisdiction. Indeed, the federal courts have issued scores of seemingly inconsistent opinions on these cross-referential cases. In this article, I offer an ordering principle for these apparently varied, cross-referential, jurisdictional cases. I argue that the federal courts only take federal question jurisdiction over cross-referenced claims when they, from a departmental perspective, maintain declaratory authority over the cross-referenced law. …
Jurisdictional Discovery In United States Federal Courts, S. I. Strong
Jurisdictional Discovery In United States Federal Courts, S. I. Strong
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
Structure And Precedent, Jeffrey C. Dobbins
Structure And Precedent, Jeffrey C. Dobbins
Michigan Law Review
The standard model of vertical precedent is part of the deep structure of our legal system. Under this model, we rarely struggle with whether a given decision of a court within a particular hierarchy is potentially binding at all. When Congress or the courts alter the standard structure and process offederal appellate review, however, that standard model of precedent breaks down. This Article examines several of these unusual appellate structures and highlights the difficulties associated with evaluating the precedential effect of decisions issued within them. For instance, when Congress consolidates challenges to agency decision making in a single federal circuit, …
Article I, Article Iii, And The Limits Of Enumeration, Gil Seinfeld
Article I, Article Iii, And The Limits Of Enumeration, Gil Seinfeld
Articles
Article I, Section 8 and Article Ill, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution deploy parallel strategies for constraining the power of the federal government. They enumerate powers that the national legislature and judiciary, respectively, are permitted to exercise and thereby implicitly prohibit these two branches of government from exercising powers not enumerated. According to conventional thinking, this strategy has failed in connection with Article I and succeeded in connection with Article III. That is, it is widely acknowledged that Congress routinely exercises powers that are difficult to square with the Article I enumeration; but it is commonly thought that the …
Conflict Of Interest And Disqualification In The Federal Courts: Suggestions For Reform, Arthur D. Hellman
Conflict Of Interest And Disqualification In The Federal Courts: Suggestions For Reform, Arthur D. Hellman
Testimony
Although federal judges do not run for election, over the last three decades the process of nomination and confirmation has become politicized to a disturbing degree. There is a real danger that the judges will come to be perceived not as dispassionate servants of the law but as political actors who pursue political or ideological agendas. One consequence of these developments is likely to be increased scrutiny of judges’ responses to motions to recuse. Here as in other aspects of the operations of the judiciary, “just trust us” is no longer sufficient.
Two provisions of Title 28 of the United …
Slides: Indian Water Rights, Robert T. Anderson
Slides: Indian Water Rights, Robert T. Anderson
Western Water Law, Policy and Management: Ripples, Currents, and New Channels for Inquiry (Martz Summer Conference, June 3-5)
Presenter: Robert T. Anderson, Native American Law Center, University of Washington Law School
19 slides
A Call For The End Of The Doctrine Of Realignment, Jacob S. Sherkow
A Call For The End Of The Doctrine Of Realignment, Jacob S. Sherkow
Articles & Chapters
In Indianapolis v. Chase National Bank, 1941, the Supreme Court established the doctrine of realignment, requiring federal courts to examine the issues in dispute and realign each party as plaintiff or defendant if necessary. Due to the complete diversity requirement, realignment gave the federal courts the ability to both create and destroy diversity jurisdiction. Since 1941, the federal courts have struggled to interpret the central holding in Indianapolis, and have created several competing "tests" for realignment. This confusion has made the doctrine of realignment unworkable. Realignment-along with each of the present tests-encourages jurisdictional abuses by forcing the federal courts to …
Jurisdiction's Noble Lie, Frederic M. Bloom
Jurisdiction's Noble Lie, Frederic M. Bloom
Publications
This Article makes sense of a lie. It shows how legal jurisdiction depends on a falsehood--and then explains why it would.
To make this novel argument, this Article starts where jurisdiction does. It recounts jurisdiction's foundations--its tests and motives, its histories and rules. It then seeks out jurisdictional reality, critically examining a side of jurisdiction we too often overlook. Legal jurisdiction may portray itself as fixed and unyielding, as natural as the force of gravity, and as stable as the firmest ground. But jurisdiction is in fact something different. It is a malleable legal invention that bears a false rigid …
Another Voice For The 'Dialogue': Federal Courts As A Litigation Course, Arthur D. Hellman
Another Voice For The 'Dialogue': Federal Courts As A Litigation Course, Arthur D. Hellman
Articles
The traditional course in "Federal Courts" - built on the model established by the great Hart and Wechsler casebook - focuses on issues of federalism, separation of powers, and institutional competence. That focus provides a powerful intellectual model for organizing the materials that make up the field of study, and it is hard to imagine anyone teaching a Federal Courts course today without drawing heavily on that model. But the traditional model is deficient in one important respect. Most of the students who take a Federal Courts course do so because they think it will help them to practice law …
The Federal Courts As A Franchise: Rethinking The Justifications For Federal Question Jurisdiction, Gil Seinfeld
The Federal Courts As A Franchise: Rethinking The Justifications For Federal Question Jurisdiction, Gil Seinfeld
Articles
The components of the Federal Franchise model-procedural homogeneity, cultural conformity, and technical competence-should be familiar. The federal courts' capacity to provide these benefits has not escaped commentators' notice; indeed, there are points of connection between these features of federal court adjudication and the individual fragments of the conventional account.l0 But prior scholarly discussion of these themes has been unsystematic, treating them as (at best) secondary considerations when it comes to the allocation of federal question cases between the state and federal courts. This Article attempts to weave together these previously disconnected strands of thinking about federal court adjudication and to …
A Unified Theory Of 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Jurisdiction, Lumen N. Mulligan
A Unified Theory Of 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Jurisdiction, Lumen N. Mulligan
Lumen N. Mulligan
Title 28, section 1331 of the United States Code provides the jurisdictional grounding for the majority of cases heard in the federal courts, yet it is not well understood. The predominant view holds that section 1331 doctrine both lacks a focus upon congressional intent and is internally inconsistent. I seek to counter both these assumptions by re-contextualizing the Court’s section 1331 jurisprudence in terms of the contemporary judicial usage of “right” (i.e., clear, mandatory obligations capable of judicial enforcement) and cause of action (i.e., permission to vindicate a right in court). In conducting this reinterpretation, I argue that section 1331 …
A Unified Theory Of 28 U.S.C. Section 1331 Jurisdiction, Lumen N. Mulligan
A Unified Theory Of 28 U.S.C. Section 1331 Jurisdiction, Lumen N. Mulligan
Faculty Works
Title 28, section 1331 of the United States Code provides the jurisdictional grounding for the majority of cases heard in the federal courts, yet it is not well understood. The predominant view holds that section 1331 doctrine both lacks a focus upon congressional intent and is internally inconsistent. I seek to counter both these assumptions by re-contextualizing the Court's section 1331 jurisprudence in terms of the contemporary judicial usage of right (i.e., clear, mandatory obligations capable of judicial enforcement) and cause of action (i.e., permission to vindicate a right in court). In conducting this reinterpretation, I argue that section 1331 …
A Call For The End Of The Doctrine Of Realignment, Jacob S. Sherkow
A Call For The End Of The Doctrine Of Realignment, Jacob S. Sherkow
Michigan Law Review
In Indianapolis v. Chase National Bank, 1941, the Supreme Court established the doctrine of realignment, requiring federal courts to examine the issues in dispute and realign each party as plaintiff or defendant if necessary. Due to the complete diversity requirement, realignment gave the federal courts the ability to both create and destroy diversity jurisdiction. Since 1941, the federal courts have struggled to interpret the central holding in Indianapolis, and have created several competing "tests" for realignment. This confusion has made the doctrine of realignment unworkable. Realignment along with each of the present tests-encourages jurisdictional abuses by forcing the federal …
Saving Special Places: Trends And Challenges With Protecting Public Lands [Outline], Robert B. Keiter
Saving Special Places: Trends And Challenges With Protecting Public Lands [Outline], Robert B. Keiter
The Future of Natural Resources Law and Policy (Summer Conference, June 6-8)
7 pages.
Includes bibliographical references
"Robert B. Keiter, Wallace Stegner Professor of Law, University of Utah, S.J. Quinney College of Law"
The Regulation Of Judicial Ethics In The Federal System: A Peek Behind Closed Doors, Arthur D. Hellman
The Regulation Of Judicial Ethics In The Federal System: A Peek Behind Closed Doors, Arthur D. Hellman
Articles
Ethical issues involving federal judges have been much in the news recently. Among other developments, the House Judiciary Committee held a hearing to consider impeaching a federal district judge; the Judicial Conference of the United States announced two major policy initiatives; and a committee chaired by Justice Stephen Breyer issued an in-depth report on the operation of the judicial misconduct statutes.
This article addresses two aspects of federal judicial ethics. The first involves conflict of interest and disqualification. Under the law, a federal judge is disqualified from hearing a case if (among other circumstances) the judge's impartiality "might reasonably be …
The Origins Of Article Iii "Arising Under" Jurisdiction, Anthony J. Bellia
The Origins Of Article Iii "Arising Under" Jurisdiction, Anthony J. Bellia
Journal Articles
Article III of the Constitution provides that the judicial Power of the United States extends to all cases arising under the Constitution, laws, and treaties of the United States. What the phrase arising under imports in Article III has long confounded courts and scholars. This Article examines the historical origins of Article III arising under jurisdiction. First, it describes English legal principles that governed the jurisdiction of courts of general and limited jurisdiction--principles that animated early American jurisprudence regarding the scope of arising under jurisdiction. Second, it explains how participants in the framing and ratification of the Constitution understood arising …
The Puzzle Of Complete Preemption, Gil Seinfeld
The Puzzle Of Complete Preemption, Gil Seinfeld
Articles
Part I introduces the central themes in the law of federal question jurisdiction. It describes the prevailing interpretations of the constitutional and statutory texts governing the federal courts' jurisdiction to adjudicate disputes involving questions of federal law, and it explores the reasons for the establishment of such jurisdiction. This Part also introduces the well-pleaded complaint rule and examines the reasons for its adoption by the Supreme Court. Part II provides a detailed account of complete preemption doctrine, under which parties are permitted to usher state-law claims into the federal courts despite the apparent absence of any federal question on the …
Sovereignty And The American Courts At The Cocktail Party Of International Law: The Dangers Of Domestic Invocations Of Foreign And International Law, Donald J. Kochan
Sovereignty And The American Courts At The Cocktail Party Of International Law: The Dangers Of Domestic Invocations Of Foreign And International Law, Donald J. Kochan
Donald J. Kochan
With increasing frequency and heightened debate, United States courts have been citing foreign and “international” law as authority for domestic decisions. This trend is inappropriate, undemocratic, and dangerous. The trend touches on fundamental concepts of sovereignty, democracy, the judicial role, and overall issues of effective governance. There are multiple problems with the judiciary’s reliance on extraterritorial and extra-constitutional foreign or international sources to guide their decisions. Perhaps the most fundamental flaw is its interference with rule of law values. To borrow from Judge Harold Levanthal, the use of international sources in judicial decision-making might be described as “the equivalent of …
Unconstitutional Courses, Frederic M. Bloom
Unconstitutional Courses, Frederic M. Bloom
Publications
By now, we almost expect Congress to fail. Nearly every time the federal courts announce a controversial decision, Congress issues a call to rein in "runaway" federal judges. And nearly every time Congress makes a "jurisdiction-stripping" threat, it comes to nothing.
But if Congress's threats possess little fire, we have still been distracted by their smoke. This Article argues that Congress's noisy calls have obscured another potent threat to the "judicial Power": the Supreme Court itself. On occasion, this Article asserts, the Court reshapes and abuses the "judicial Power"--not through bold pronouncements or obvious doctrinal revisions, but through something more …
A State's Power To Enter Into A Consent Decree That Violates State Law Provisions: What "Findings" Of A Federal Violation Are Sufficient To Justify A Consent Decree That Trumps State Law?, David W. Swift
ExpressO
In the last forty years federal courts have played a prominent role in reshaping our public institutions. And while some scholars question the efficacy of these structural injuctions, the authority of federal courts to order such relief is generally unquestioned. What is open to debate, however, is whether state officials can agree to a remedy they would not have had the authority to order themselves; and if so, to what extent must an underlying constitutional violation be proved so as to justify the remedy?
This article discusses the competing theories and concludes that a remedy that violates state law may …
The Political Economy Of The Production Of Customary International Law: The Role Of Non-Governmental Organizations, Donald J. Kochan
The Political Economy Of The Production Of Customary International Law: The Role Of Non-Governmental Organizations, Donald J. Kochan
Donald J. Kochan
Increasingly, United States courts are recognizing various treaties, as well as declarations, proclamations, conventions, resolutions, programmes, protocols, and similar forms of inter- or multi-national “legislation” as evidence of a body of “customary international law” enforceable in domestic courts, particularly in the area of tort liability. These “legislative” documents, which this Article refers to as customary international law outputs, are seen by some courts as evidence of jus cogens norms that bind not only nations and state actors, but also private individuals. The most obvious evidence of this trend is in the proliferation of lawsuits against corporations with ties to the …
State Laws And The Independent Judiciary: An Analysis Of The Effects Of The Seventeenth Amendment On The Number Of Supreme Court Cases Holding State Laws Unconstitutional, Donald J. Kochan
Donald J. Kochan
In recent years, the Seventeenth Amendment has been the subject of legal scholarship, congressional hearings and debate, Supreme Court opinions, popular press articles and commentary, state legislative efforts aimed at repeal, and activist repeal movements. To date, the literature on the effects of the Seventeenth Amendment has focused almost exclusively on the effects on the political production of legislation and competition between legislative bodies. Very little attention has been given to the potential adverse effects of the Seventeenth Amendment on the relationship between state legislatures and the federal courts. This Article seeks to fill part of that literature gap, applying …
Towards A Constitutional Architecture For Cooperative Federalism, Philip J. Weiser
Towards A Constitutional Architecture For Cooperative Federalism, Philip J. Weiser
Publications
In this Article, Professor Weiser calls for a new conception of federal-state relations to justify existing political practice under cooperative federalism regulatory programs. In particular, Professor Weiser highlights how Congress favors cooperative federalism programs--that combine federal and state authority in creative ways--and has rejected the dual federalism model of regulation--with separate spheres of state and federal authority that current judicial rhetoric often celebrates. Given the increasing dissonance between prevailing political practice and judicial rhetoric, courts will ultimately have to confront three fault lines for current cooperative federalism programs: the legal source of authority for state agencies to implement federal law, …