Jurisdiction Commons^™

Empowering United States Courts To Hear Crimes Within The Jurisdiction Of The International Criminal Court, Douglass Cassel

Journal Articles

United States courts have only incomplete and uneven jurisdiction, most acquired piecemeal and only in recent years, to prosecute genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity committed outside our borders. Recent developments in international law and practice-especially the heightened commitment of democracies including the United States to end impunity for atrocities, and the imminent prospect of a permanent International Criminal Court (ICC) with worldwide jurisdiction-suggest the need to expand and rationalize the jurisdiction of U.S. courts to make it coextensive with that of the ICC.

It now appears all but certain that the ICC will come into being in the …

Federal Regulation Of State Court Procedures, Anthony J. Bellia Jr.

Journal Articles

May Congress regulate the procedures by which state courts adjudicate claims arising under state law? Recently, Congress not only has considered several bills that would do so, but has enacted a few of them. This Article concludes that such laws exceed Congress's constitutional authority. There are serious questions as to whether a regulation of court procedures qualifies as a regulation of interstate commerce under the Commerce Clause. Even assuming, however, that it does qualify as such, the Tenth Amendment reserves the power to regulate court procedures to the states. Members of the Founding generation used conflict-of-laws language to describe a …

The International Criminal Court: Complementarity With National Criminal Jurisdiction, Jimmy Gurule

Journal Articles

The 1998 Rome Statute established an International Criminal Court. Is its jurisdiction truly complementary to the national criminal jurisdictions?

The Erie Doctrine Revisited: How A Conflicts Perspective Can Aid The Analysis, Joseph P. Bauer

Journal Articles

I have taught Civil Procedure for the past twenty-five years. Having returned to teaching Conflict of Laws last year, after not having taught that course since the mid-1980s, I was interested in re-examining the Erie doctrine from the vantage point of both of these subject areas. My goal was to see whether a combination of learning from these two related disciplines would introduce additional coherence into the analysis of this topic.

In one sense, the Erie doctrine and traditional choice of law determinations present analogous questions, since they both involve making a selection between competing legal rules. Choice of law …

The Icc's New Legal Landscape: The Need To Expand U.S. Domestic Jurisdiction To Prosecute Genocide, War Crimes And Crimes Against Humanity, Douglass Cassel

Journal Articles

The United States was one of only seven nations to vote against the treaty. The ensuing debate within the United States has properly focused on whether the United States can and should ratify the treaty or, if not, whether as a non-party the United States should support or oppose the new court. Largely overlooked, however, are two separate but related questions: (1) should the existing, incomplete jurisdiction of U.S. courts over crimes within the ICC Statute be expanded to ensure that such crimes may also be prosecuted in U.S. courts, under universal jurisdiction or other bases allowed by international law?; …

Congressional Control Over Federal Court Jurisdiction: A Defense Of The Traditional View, Julian Velasco

Journal Articles

The extent of Congress's authority to control the jurisdiction of the federal courts has been the subject of unending academic debate. The orthodox view long has been that Congress possesses nearly plenary authority to restrict federal court jurisdiction. There has been no shortage, however, of commentators who have taken exception to that view. The heart of the debate lies in whether Congress is authorized to remove specific subjects from the jurisdiction of federal courts when motivated by hostility to their substantive decisions. According to the traditional view, Congress is free to use its power in this manner. While most traditionalists …

Once More Into The Maze: United States V. Lopez, Tribal Self-Determination, And Federal Conspiracy Jurisdiction In Indian Country, Richard W. Garnett

Journal Articles

From the Introduction

This Article may not tie up this loose end to everyone's satisfaction, but it should contribute to a better understanding of federal criminal jurisdiction in Indian Country, through detailed examination of the relevant caselaw, animated by reflection on first principles. Part II lays out a few, very general, "big ideas" concerning the crucial connection between jurisdiction - especially criminal jurisdiction - and community self-determination. Part III provides specific background, and introduces the complicated rubric of federal criminal jurisdiction in general, and of jurisdiction in Indian Country in particular. Part IV examines the possible bases, or "hooks," for …

May A Federal Court Remand A Case To State Court After Federal Claims Have Been Deleted?, Joseph P. Bauer

Journal Articles

This Article provides a preview of Carnegie-Mellon University v. Honorable Maurice B. Cohill, Jr., argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on November 10, 1987. This case concerns the circumstances under which a lawsuit, properly commenced in a state court and then removed before trial to a federal court, may be sent back (remanded) to the state court.

On one level, this case seems only to involve technical interpretations of federal statutes governing procedure in the federal courts. At another level, however, it involves more general and important issues. Among these are how to allocate judicial power …

Withdrawing Jurisdiction From Federal Courts, Charles E. Rice

Journal Articles

Courts today accept two incorrect assumptions when interpreting the federal constitution. First, they assume that the judiciary is the sole branch with the definitive power in interpreting the Constitution. Second, they assume that the Supreme Court's decisions on constitutional interpretation are the law of the land and equal to the language of the Constitution itself. This Article proposes that Congress ought to exercise its removal power of appellate jurisdiction from the federal courts in certain areas of law to limit the Supreme Court’s power in creating law that expands the Constitution, which is mistakenly viewed today with equal stature as …

Symposium Proceedings: Congressional Limits On Federal Court Jurisdiction, Charles E. Rice

Journal Articles

Judge Sloviter: Professor Rice, your view of the constitutional scheme is that Congress has the power to make surgical excisions to the jurisdictions of the federal courts. I wonder if you would comment on what one of my colleagues might call the worst case scenario. That is, whether Congress could by legislation abolish all inferior federal courts and eliminate all Supreme Court appellate jurisdiction. What then would remain of the judicial power?

Congress And The Supreme Court's Jurisdiction, Charles E. Rice

Journal Articles

When a ruling of the supreme court meets with Congressional disfavor there are several remedies available to Congress. If the decision is not on a constitutional level, a later statutory enactment will suffice to reverse or modify the ruling. If, however, the Court's decision is an interpretation of a constitutional mandate, such as the requirement of the fourteenth amendment that legislative districts be apportioned according to population, then a statute could not reverse the decision because the statute itself would be subject to that constitutional mandate as defined by the Court.

The obvious method of reversing a Supreme Court interpretation …

World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. V. Woodson: Reflections On The Road Ahead, Kenneth F. Ripple, Mollie A. Murphy

Journal Articles

During its past several terms the Supreme Court of the United States has, after a long period of inactivity, engaged in a reexamination of the constitutional limitations on state court jurisdiction. Last term, in World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson, this reexamination reached a new plateau. Woodson significantly elucidated the constitutional policy considerations underlying this area. Yet, as so often occurs in constitutional litigation, the resolution of old doubts has also brought into sharper focus other yet unresolved issues.

This article has two purposes. First, it will assess the significance of Woodson in the overall doctrinal development of jurisdictional standards. Second, …

Book Review, Clarence Emmett Manion

Journal Articles

Reviewing: THE PRICE OF PERFECT JUSTICE. By Macklin Fleming. The Adverse Consequences of Current Legal Doctrine on the American Courtroom. Justice of the California Court of Appeals (Basic Books, Inc. New York).