Courts Commons^™

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 …

Estate Of Pew V. Cardarelli, Rachel Bell

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Sorting Out Civil Jurisdiction In Indian Country After Plains Commerce Bank: State Courts And The Judicial Sovereignty Of The Navajo Nation, Dale Beck Furnish

American Indian Law Review

No abstract provided.

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 …

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 …

Treaties As "Part Of Our Law", Ernest A. Young

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Maritime Delimitation In The Black Sea (Romania V. Ukraine), Coalter G. Lathrop

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

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 …

On Jurisdictional Elephants And Kangaroo Courts, Stephen I. Vladeck

NULR Online

No abstract provided.

Judicial Foreign Policy: Lessons From The 1790s, David Sloss

Faculty Publications

This Article demonstrates that the exclusive political control thesis is incompatible with the original understanding of the Founders. The Article does not defend originalism as a method of constitutional interpretation; it merely shows that the exclusive political control thesis is inconsistent with an originalist approach.

The Article examines the implementation of U.S. neutrality policy in the period from 1793 to 1797. Other scholars have analyzed the initial formulation of U.S. neutrality policy in 1793. Scholars who focus narrowly on the year 1793, when the United States first articulated its neutrality policy, have concluded that "the federal courts played a relatively …

The Supreme Common Law Court Of The United States, Jack M. Beermann

Faculty Scholarship

The U.S. Supreme Court's primary role in the history of the United States, especially in constitutional cases (and cases hovering in the universe of the Constitution), has been to limit Congress's ability to redefine and redistribute rights in a direction most people would characterize as liberal. In other words, the Supreme Court, for most of the history of the United States since the adoption of the Constitution, has been a conservative force against change and redistribution. The Court has used five distinct devices to advance its control over the law. First, it has construed rights-creating constitutional provisions narrowly when those …

Beyond Guantánamo, Obstacles And Options (Part Ii), Gregory S. Mcneal

NULR Online

No abstract provided.

Beyond Guantánamo, Obstacles And Options, Gregory S. Mcneal

NULR Online

No abstract provided.

A Personal Jurisdiction Dilemma: Collateral Attacks On Foreign Judgments In U.S. Recognition Proceedings, J. Chad Mitchell

Brigham Young University International Law & Management Review

No abstract provided.

"Manifest" Destiny?: How Some Courts Have Fallaciously Come To Require A Greater Showing Of Congressional Intent For Jurisdictional Exhaustion Than They Require For Preemption, Colin Miller

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Prosecuting Aggression, Noah Weisbord

Faculty Publications

The Assembly of States Parties to the International Criminal Court will soon have its first opportunity to revise the Rome Statute and activate the latent crime of aggression, which awaits a definition of its elements and conditions for the exercise of jurisdiction. The working group charged with drafting a provision is scheduled to complete its task by 2008 or 2009, one year before the International Criminal Court’s first review conference.

Beginning with a history of the crime meant to put the current negotiations in the context of past initiatives, this article sets out the status of the negotiations and begins …

"I'D Grab At Anything. And I'D Forget." Domestic Violence Victim Testimony After Davis V. Washington, 41 J. Marshall L. Rev. 937 (2008), Nancee Alexa Barth

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Nontestimonial Declarations Against Penal Interest: Eschewing The Corroboration Requirement For Inculpatory Statements, 41 J. Marshall L. Rev. 969 (2008), Michael Duffy

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Taking Liberties: The Personal Jurisdiction Of Military Commissions, Madeline Morris

Faculty Scholarship

On September 11, 2001, Al Qaeda operatives attacked civilian and military targets on US territory, causing thousands of deaths and billions of dollars of economic loss. The next day, the United Nations Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 1368 characterizing the attack by Al Qaeda as a "threat to international peace and security" and recognizing the right of states to use armed force in self defense.

The Quest For Creative Jurisdiction: The Evolution Of Personal Jurisdiction Doctrine Of Israeli Courts Toward The Palestinian Territories, Michael M. Karayanni

Michigan Journal of International Law

The thesis offered in this Article, marking three different stages in the development of the personal jurisdiction doctrine of Israeli courts toward the PT of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, has two additional attributes. One concerns the doctrinal innovation in the general personal jurisdiction doctrine of Israeli courts that also took place as these different stages unfolded. The evolving status of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip over the years, together with the need of courts to reach conclusive results in the cases brought before them, made it necessary for courts to be creative in adjusting the …

Slavery, Federalism, And The Constitution: Ableman V. Booth And The Struggle Over Fugitive Slaves , Earl M. Maltz

Cleveland State Law Review

The Article will discuss and analyze the forces that shaped Ableman v. Booth, one of the most dramatic confrontations in the long-running dispute over fugitive slaves, the Supreme Court's disposition of the case, and the aftermath of the decision. The Article will begin by describing the state of the dispute over fugitive slaves in the mid-1850s. The Article will then recount the events that brought Ableman to the Supreme Court and analyze the Court's opinion. Finally, the Article will discuss the aftermath and significance of the dispute.

Independent Of The Constitution?--Issues Raised By An Independent Federal Legislative Ethics Commission With Independent Enforcement Authority, Paul Taylor

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

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 …

The Accounting: Habeas Corpus And Enemy Combatants, Emily Calhoun

Publications

The judiciary should impose a heavy burden of justification on the executive when a habeas petitioner challenges the accuracy of facts on which an enemy combatant designation rests. A heavy burden of justification will ensure that the essential institutional purposes of the writ--and legitimate, separated-powers government--are preserved, even during times of national exigency. The institutional purposes of the writ argue for robust judicial review rather than deference to the executive. Moreover, the procedural flexibility traditionally associated with the writ gives the judiciary the tools to ensure that a heavy burden of justification can be imposed.

The Early History Of The Colorado Court Of Appeals, Robert M. Linz, Claire E. Munger

Publications

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Amici Curiae Law Professors In Support Of Petitioner Goss International Corp., Salil Kumar Mehra, Jay Tidmarsh

Court Briefs

No. 07-618
Goss International Corp. v. Tokyo Kikai Seisakusho, Ltd.

On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

From the Introduction and Summary of Argument

This case presents issues of jurisdiction, equity, and international comity that require this Court’s resolution. As we understand the facts, in 2003 the petitioner, Goss International, obtained a judgment under the Antidumping Act of 1916, 15 U.S.C. § 72 (2000) (repealed 2004), against the respondents, which are a Japanese corporation and its wholly-owned American subsidiary. The consonance between the Antidumping Act and the obligations of the …

Slides: Forest And Rangeland Planning, Nepa Analysis And Decisions, Glenn Casamassa

The Future of Natural Resources Law and Policy (Summer Conference, June 6-8)

Presenter: Glenn Casamassa, Forest Supervisor, Arapahoe-Roosevelt National Forest

17 slides

Slides: Forests And Grasslands, Federico Cheever

The Future of Natural Resources Law and Policy (Summer Conference, June 6-8)

Presenter: Professor Federico Cheever, University of Denver Sturm College of Law

30 slides

Slides: Nepa And Public Participation In Grazing Management On Federal Public Lands: The 40-Year Struggle, Joe Feller

The Future of Natural Resources Law and Policy (Summer Conference, June 6-8)

Presenter: Joe Feller, College of Law, Arizona State University

22 slides

Currents In Water Resources Law And Policy: How Is “Prior” Coping With New Stresses? [Outline], A. Dan Tarlock, David H. Getches

The Future of Natural Resources Law and Policy (Summer Conference, June 6-8)

3 pages.

Includes bibliographical references

"A. Dan Tarlock, Distinguished Professor of Law and Director, Program in Environmental and Energy Law, Chicago-Kent College of Law"

"David H. Getches, Dean and Raphael J. Moses Professor of Natural Resources Law, University of Colorado Law School"