Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Amendments to Rule 23 (1)
- American Indian nations (1)
- Antitrust (1)
- Capacity to sue (1)
- Class actions (1)
-
- Congress (1)
- Consent to be sued (1)
- Conservative legal movement (1)
- Constitutional (1)
- Courts (1)
- Empirical research (1)
- Immigration (1)
- Immunity of tribal officers (1)
- Injunctions (1)
- Intellectual property (1)
- Judicial review (1)
- Legal history (1)
- Litigation (1)
- Litigation reform (1)
- Patents (1)
- Per se rule (1)
- Polarization (1)
- Politics & ideology of judiciary (1)
- Private enforcement of rights (1)
- Remedies (1)
- Restrictions on private enforcement of legislation (1)
- Rule of reason (1)
- Rules Enabling Act (1)
- SCOTUS (1)
- Sovereign immunity (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Litigation
Rights And Retrenchment In The Trump Era, Stephen B. Burbank, Sean Farhang
Rights And Retrenchment In The Trump Era, Stephen B. Burbank, Sean Farhang
All Faculty Scholarship
Our aim in this essay is to leverage archival research, data and theoretical perspectives presented in our book, Rights and Retrenchment: The Counterrevolution against Federal Litigation, as a means to illuminate the prospects for retrenchment in the current political landscape. We follow the scheme of the book by separately considering the prospects for federal litigation retrenchment in three lawmaking sites: Congress, federal court rulemaking under the Rules Enabling Act, and the Supreme Court. Although pertinent data on current retrenchment initiatives are limited, our historical data and comparative institutional perspectives should afford a basis for informed prediction. Of course, little in …
“Nationwide” Injunctions Are Really “Universal” Injunctions And They Are Never Appropriate, Howard Wasserman
“Nationwide” Injunctions Are Really “Universal” Injunctions And They Are Never Appropriate, Howard Wasserman
Faculty Publications
Federal district courts are routinely issuing broad injunctions prohibiting the federal government from enforcing constitutionally invalid laws, regulations, and policies on immigration and immigration-adjacent issues. Styled “nationwide injunctions,” they prohibit enforcement of the challenges laws not only against the named plaintiffs, but against all people and entities everywhere.
The first problem with these injunctions is one of nomenclature. “Nationwide” suggests something about the “where” of the injunction, the geographic scope in which it protects. The better term is “universal injunction,” which captures the real controversy over the “who” of the injunction, as courts purport to protect the universe of all …
The Rule Of Reason, Herbert J. Hovenkamp
The Rule Of Reason, Herbert J. Hovenkamp
All Faculty Scholarship
Antitrust’s rule of reason was born out of a thirty-year (1897-1927) division among Supreme Court Justices about the proper way to assess multi-firm restraints on competition. By the late 1920s the basic contours of the rule for restraints among competitors was roughly established. Antitrust policy toward vertical restraints remained much more unstable, however, largely because their effects were so poorly understood.
This article provides a litigation field guide for antitrust claims under the rule of reason – or more precisely, for situations when application of the rule of reason is likely. At the time pleadings are drafted and even up …
To Sue And Be Sued: Capacity And Immunity Of American Indian Nations, Richard B. Collins
To Sue And Be Sued: Capacity And Immunity Of American Indian Nations, Richard B. Collins
Publications
Can American Indian nations sue and be sued in federal and state courts? Specific issues are whether tribes have corporate capacity to sue, whether a Native group has recognized status as a tribe, and whether and to what extent tribes and their officers have governmental immunity from suit. Tribal capacity to sue is now well established, and federal law has well-defined procedures and rules for tribal recognition. But tribal sovereign immunity is actively disputed.
This Article reviews retained tribal sovereignty in general and summarizes past contests over tribal capacity to sue and their resolution into today’s settled rule. Next is …