Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 23 of 23

Full-Text Articles in Law

State Net Neutrality, Daniel A. Lyons Oct 2019

State Net Neutrality, Daniel A. Lyons

Daniel Lyons

For nearly a century, state regulators played an important role in telecommunications regulation. The 1934 Communications Act gave the Federal Communications Commission authority to regulate interstate telephone service, but explicitly left intrastate calls—which comprised 98% of Depression-era telephone traffic—to state public utility commissions. By the late 2000s, however, as landline telephony faded to obscurity, scholars and policymakers alike recognized that the era of comprehensive state telecommunications regulation had largely come to an end.

Perhaps surprisingly, however, the first years of the Trump Administration have seen a resurgence in state telecommunications regulation—driven not by state institutional concerns, but by policy disagreements …


Forward: Some Puzzles Of State Standing, Tara Leigh Grove Sep 2019

Forward: Some Puzzles Of State Standing, Tara Leigh Grove

Tara L. Grove

When should states have standing? In recent years, there has been an explosion in literature on that question.1 Yet, even today, there seem to be as many questions as answers. In this Foreword to the Notre Dame Law Review’s 2019 Federal Courts, Practice, and Procedure Symposium on state standing, I discuss a few such puzzles. First, should states have “special” standing when they sue the federal government—that is, greater access to federal court than private parties? Second, and conversely, should states have at least “equal” access to federal court, or should they face more barriers than private parties? These questions …


Should The Supreme Court Fear Congress?, Neal Devins Sep 2019

Should The Supreme Court Fear Congress?, Neal Devins

Neal E. Devins

No abstract provided.


The Structural Safeguards Of Federal Jurisdiction, Tara Leigh Grove Sep 2019

The Structural Safeguards Of Federal Jurisdiction, Tara Leigh Grove

Tara L. Grove

Scholars have long debated Congress’s power to curb federal jurisdiction and have consistently assumed that the constitutional limits on Congress’s authority (if any) must be judicially enforceable and found in the text and structure of Article III. In this Article, I challenge that fundamental assumption. I argue that the primary constitutional protection for the federal judiciary lies instead in the bicameralism and presentment requirements of Article I. These Article I lawmaking procedures give competing political factions (even political minorities) considerable power to “veto” legislation. Drawing on recent social science and legal scholarship, I argue that political factions are particularly likely …


The Lost History Of The Political Question Doctrine, Tara Leigh Grove Sep 2019

The Lost History Of The Political Question Doctrine, Tara Leigh Grove

Tara L. Grove

This Article challenges the conventional narrative about the political question doctrine. Scholars commonly assert that the doctrine, which instructs that certain constitutional questions are “committed” to Congress or to the executive branch, has been part of our constitutional system since the early nineteenth century. Furthermore, scholars argue that the doctrine is at odds with the current Supreme Court’s view of itself as the “supreme expositor” of all constitutional questions. This Article calls into question both claims. The Article demonstrates, first, that the current political question doctrine does not have the historical pedigree that scholars attribute to it. In the nineteenth …


The Origins (And Fragility) Of Judicial Independence, Tara Leigh Grove Sep 2019

The Origins (And Fragility) Of Judicial Independence, Tara Leigh Grove

Tara L. Grove

The federal judiciary today takes certain things for granted. Political actors will not attempt to remove Article III judges outside the impeachment process; they will not obstruct federal court orders; and they will not tinker with the Supreme Court’s size in order to pack it with like-minded Justices. And yet a closer look reveals that these “self-evident truths” of judicial independence are neither self-evident nor necessary implications of our constitutional text, structure, and history. This Article demonstrates that many government officials once viewed these court-curbing measures as not only constitutionally permissible but also desirable (and politically viable) methods of “checking” …


The Power Of "So-Called Judges", Tara Leigh Grove Sep 2019

The Power Of "So-Called Judges", Tara Leigh Grove

Tara L. Grove

No abstract provided.


The Dark Side Of Territoriality, Timothy Zick Sep 2019

The Dark Side Of Territoriality, Timothy Zick

Timothy Zick

No abstract provided.


Sovereignty, Territoriality, And The Enforcement Of Foreign Judgments, George Rutherglen, James Y. Stern Sep 2019

Sovereignty, Territoriality, And The Enforcement Of Foreign Judgments, George Rutherglen, James Y. Stern

James Y. Stern

No abstract provided.


The Ultimate Independence Of The Federal Courts: Defying The Supreme Court In The Exercise Of Federal Common Law Powers, Ronald H. Rosenberg Sep 2019

The Ultimate Independence Of The Federal Courts: Defying The Supreme Court In The Exercise Of Federal Common Law Powers, Ronald H. Rosenberg

Ronald H. Rosenberg

No abstract provided.


An Organizational Account Of State Standing, Katherine Mims Crocker Sep 2019

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 at least one …


The Twin Aims Of Erie, Michael S. Green Sep 2019

The Twin Aims Of Erie, Michael S. Green

Michael S. Green

We all remember the twin aims of the Erie rule from first-year civil procedure. A federal court sitting in diversity must use forum state law if it is necessary to avoid 'forum shopping" and the "inequitable administration of the laws." This Article offers a reading of the twin aims and a systematic analysis of their proper role in federal and state court. I argue that the twin aims apply in diversity cases not because they protect state interests, but because they serve the federal purposes standing behind the diversity statute. So understood, they are about separation of powers, not federalism. …


Erie, Swift, And Legal Positivism, Michael S. Green Sep 2019

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

Michael S. Green

No abstract provided.


The Jurisdiction Canon, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl Sep 2019

The Jurisdiction Canon, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

This Article concerns the interpretation of jurisdictional statutes. The fundamental postulate of the law of the federal courts is that the federal courts are courts of limited subject-matter jurisdiction. That principle is reinforced by a canon of statutory interpretation according to which statutes conferring federal subject-matter jurisdiction are to be construed narrowly, with ambiguities resolved against the availability of federal jurisdiction. This interpretive canon is over a century old and has been recited in thousands of federal cases, but its future has become uncertain. The Supreme Court recently stated that the canon does not apply to many of today’s most …


Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl Sep 2019

Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

No abstract provided.


One Good Plaintiff Is Not Enough, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl Sep 2019

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 Sep 2019

Abstention Doctrine, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

No abstract provided.


Abstention At The Border, Maggie Gardner Jun 2019

Abstention At The Border, Maggie Gardner

Maggie Gardner

The lower federal courts have been invoking “international comity abstention” to solve a range of problems in cross-border cases, using a wide array of tests that vary not just across the circuits, but within them as well. That confusion will only grow, as both scholars and the Supreme Court have yet to clarify what exactly “international comity abstention” entails. Meanwhile, the breadth of “international comity abstention” stands in tension with the Supreme Court’s recent reemphasis on the federal judiciary’s obligation to exercise congressionally granted jurisdiction. Indeed, loose applications of “international comity abstention” risk undermining not only the expressed preferences of …


Backlash Against International Courts In West, East And Southern Africa: Causes And Consequences, Karen J. Alter, James T. Gathii, Laurence R. Helfer Jun 2019

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 states agreed to …


The "Guarantee" Clause, Ryan C. Williams Apr 2019

The "Guarantee" Clause, Ryan C. Williams

Ryan Williams

Article IV’s command that “the United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government” stands as one of the few remaining lacunae in the judicially enforced Constitution. For well over a century, federal courts have viewed the provision — traditionally known as the Guarantee Clause but now referred to by some as the “Republican Form of Government” Clause — as a paradigmatic example of a nonjusticiable political question. In recent years, however, both the Supreme Court and lower federal courts have signaled a new willingness to reconsider this much-criticized jurisdictional barrier in an appropriate …


Plaintiff Personal Jurisdiction And Venue Transfer, Scott Dodson Dec 2018

Plaintiff Personal Jurisdiction And Venue Transfer, Scott Dodson

Scott Dodson

Personal jurisdiction usually focuses on the rights of the defendant. That is because a plaintiff implicitly consents to personal jurisdiction in the court where the plaintiff chooses to file. But what if the defendant seeks to transfer venue to a court in a state in which the plaintiff has no contacts and never consented to personal jurisdiction? Lower courts operate on the assumption that, in both ordinary venue-transfer cases under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) and multidistrict-litigation cases under § 1407(a), personal-jurisdiction concerns for plaintiffs simply do not apply. I contest that assumption. Neither statute expands the statutory authorization of federal-court …


Dual Regulation Of Insurance, Christopher French Dec 2018

Dual Regulation Of Insurance, Christopher French

Christopher C. French

Since this country was created, the insurance industry has been principally
regulated by the states with infrequent Congressional interventions.
As the insurance industry has evolved in recent decades, however, individual
states have become unable to adequately regulate some insurers, such
as multinational insurers and foreign insurers, because they lack jurisdiction
over such entities. Simply having the federal government assume responsibility
for regulating insurers will not solve the current regulatory
problems, however, because Congress’ past forays into regulating certain
areas of insurance generally have yielded poor results. Consequently, this
Article makes the novel proposal and argument that, with the creation of …


Beyond Bias In Diversity Jurisdiction, Scott Dodson Dec 2018

Beyond Bias In Diversity Jurisdiction, Scott Dodson

Scott Dodson

The long-running debate over the propriety and proper scope of diversity jurisdiction has always centered on the traditional justification for diversity jurisdiction: the need to avoid actual or perceived state-court bias against out-of-state parties. Supporters of diversity jurisdiction assert that such bias continues to justify diversity jurisdiction, while opponents argue that it does not. In my view, both sides have it wrong. Supporters are wrong that out-of-state bias and its perception are sufficient to justify diversity jurisdiction today. Yet opponents are wrong that the lack of bias supports the abolition or extreme restriction of diversity jurisdiction. The problem is the …