Jurisdiction Commons^™

8933 Square Knot Trust, A Nevada Trust, Appellant V. The Bank Of New York Mellon, 142 Nev. Adv. Op. 56 (Aug. 20, 2026), William Fischer

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Under NRCP 12(g)(2), additional motions for dismissal may not be filed unless for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction or the arguments were preserved at initial filing. Subject-matter jurisdiction is determined at the onset of a proceeding.

Jurisdictional Waters, Jamison E. Colburn

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Aggregation And The “Universal” Injunction, Portia Pedro, Adam N. Steinman

Faculty Scholarship

In this Essay, we begin with a brief summary of the CASA decision’s holding regarding the availability of “universal” injunctions. Part II discusses the relationship between remedies and judicial review and the important role that such injunctions play in that regard. Part III explores how class actions could serve as an alternative path for federal courts, after engaging in judicial review, to make their decisions meaningful by requiring officials to comply with the law and to cease illegal actions or policies. We also respond to several objections to the use of class actions in this context. The final Part addresses …

State Of Nevada V. Rocky Stanley Salazar, 123 Nev. Adv. Op. 45 (May 28, 2026), Bowen Fuller

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

When second-degree murder by a controlled substance starts on tribal land but consummates on nontribal land, the state has jurisdiction to prosecute the crime.

Citators In The Ai Age: Preserving The Human Component Through Court-Created Citators, Cody B. James

Faculty Law Review Articles

Citators have long worked behind the scenes, shaping case law and influencing how judges and lawyers view precedent. Yet their creation has been the sole realm of private publishers. As artificial intelligence (AI) is further integrated into citators’ creation, the human role is at risk of being automated. This article examines citators’ influence over substantive law, the human-in-the-loop justifications for preserving human involvement in citators’ creation, and the argument for courts to produce their own citators. By reclaiming this function, the courts can help enhance their legitimacy and preserve the human role in creating structures of legal information in the …

Dokdo/Takeshima And Maritime Delimitation Between The Republic Of Korea And Japan: A Comment On Icj Dispute Resolution, Katherine Angell

Celebrating WCL Student Authors

The Republic of Korea (Korea) should agree to submit the issue of sovereignty over Dokdo/Takeshima and the issue of maritime delimitation in the East Sea/Sea of Japan to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) because the ICJ is likely to decide that Dokdo/Takeshima is Korean territory and the tensions in the East Sea/Sea of Japan can be resolved to allow further cooperation between the two nations. The ICJ is the primary avenue for peacefully resolving territorial and maritime delimitation disputes between nations, and the ICJ has developed a substantial body of case law analyzing these issues. The ICJ considers various …

Law Library Blog (January 2026): Legal Beagle's Blog Archive, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Law Library Newsletters/Blog

No abstract provided.

International Law Duties Not To Recognize, Not To Assist, And To Cooperate Against Peremptory Norms (Jus Cogens) Violations,, Diane A. Desierto

Journal Articles

Peremptory norms (jus cogens) are the highest norms of international law. When these norms are violated, all States and international organizations have, at a minimum, three international legal duties to discharge while the violation is occurring: (1) the duty of non-recognition, where no State or international organization should recognize the situation caused by the violation; (2) the duty of non-assistance, where no State or international organization should render any aid or assistance to maintain this situation caused by the violation; and (3) the duty of cooperation, where all States and international organizations should cooperate to bring the violation to an …

Critical Approaches To Jurisdiction: The Struggle For Control Of Indigenous Lands And Resources, Dayna Scott

Articles & Book Chapters

This chapter questions the starting assumptions in thinking through questions of “jurisdiction” in public law, specifically in relation to assertions of inherent Indigenous territorial governing authority. It reviews the common conceptual images of jurisdiction we employ in law schools and offers resources from critical interdisciplinary theory for new conceptions. In highlighting examples of the present exercise of Indigenous territorial jurisdiction, such as the Kunst'aa guu— Kunst'aayah Reconciliation Protocol and the Tsleil-Waututh Sacred Trust Assessment of the Trans Mountain Expansion (TMX) project, the chapter urges public law scholars to adopt an orientation of prefiguration in order to bring into being conceptualizations …

Chimeric Contacts And Consent: The Ill-Reasoned Expansion Of Corporate Jurisdictional Exposure, James Paul George

Faculty Scholarship

Two recent Supreme Court decisions have imposed aspects of general jurisdiction in a way that exposes corporations and possibly other legal actors to litigation in spuriously connected forums. One case-Ford Motor Company v. Montana-reached a fair result but with strained reasoning that will support unfair results. The second case-Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railroad Company-was wrong on the facts and the law, imposing general jurisdiction based on a vaguely worded corporate registration statute validated by a more than century-old precedent based on Pennoyer v. Neff's limited territorial model. Both decisions were the result of conceptual corners the Supreme Court has created …

Burdens Of Proof In Criminal Procedure, Eve Brensike Primus

Articles

The Supreme Court’s haphazard approach to allocating burdens of proof in criminal procedure has created a system in which constitutional rights can be rendered meaningless simply because defendants are required to prove things they cannot possibly know. Even though allocations of the burden of proof often drive litigation outcomes, the Court has failed to establish clear burden allocation structures for cases arising under the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments, leaving lower courts split about how to allocate the burdens. When the Supreme Court does allocate burdens, it often does so without explanation or consideration of key factors. Recent Supreme …

Brief Of Law Professors As Amici Curiae In Support Of Plaintiff-Appellees, Ira P. Robbins

Amicus Briefs & Court Filings

INTRODUCTION: The Executive Order at issue in these appeals targets a small and uniquely vulnerable minority of transgender women—those currently housed in federal women’s prisons—by commanding the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) to transfer them immediately to men’s facilities. Amici file in support of Plaintiffs-Appellees (hereinafter “Plaintiffs”), to address two procedural arguments made by Defendants-Appellants (“the government”). First, Congress has not eliminated federal court jurisdiction to decide Plaintiffs’ challenge to the transfer provisions of the Executive Order. Second, the government overreads the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA); Plaintiffs’ lawsuit is not improper or premature under that statute’s exhaustion requirement because …

Competence-Competence, Delegation, And The Aaa/Icdr Rules, Christopher R. Drahozal, George A. Bermann, Jack J. Coe Jr., Catherine A. Rogers

Faculty Scholarship

In 2021 and 2022, the American Arbitration Association (AAA) and the International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR) amended their arbitration rules to address a “potential controversy” said to be caused by the Restatement of the U.S. Law of International Commercial and Investor-State Arbitration. The “potential controversy” is over whether the rules providing that arbitrators have “the power to rule on [their] own jurisdiction” should be interpreted as delegation clauses — that is, as “clearly and unmistakably” delegating exclusive authority to resolve jurisdictional challenges to the arbitrators instead of the court. Most courts have so interpreted the rules.

By contrast, the …

The Pressure Points Of Professional Identity For Judges In The Modern Era, Charles G. Geyh

Articles by Maurer Faculty

The duties core to the professional identity of a judge are encapsulated in an ethical directive at the literal forefront of the Model Code of Judicial Conduct, some variation of which all state and federal judiciaries have adopted. Rule 1.2 provides that “[a] judge shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary[.]” This directive implicates three challenges, or pressure points, relevant to a judge’s identity: 1) insofar as judges begin their legal careers as practicing lawyers, when they ascend the bench their professional identities must transition from …

Put Me In, Coach: Constitutional Concerns Of Judicial Activism And Legislating From The Bench, Jacob M. Elliott

Senior Honors Theses

Unrestrained judicial activism and legislating from the bench at the Supreme Court level place federalism and freedom in jeopardy. By ignoring crucial doctrines like jurisdiction, deference, and independence, the Supreme Court has demonstrated a tendency toward reinterpreting existing Constitutional precedent as they see fit, basing judgments on extra-legal influences, and supplanting Constitutional principles with their own personal policy preferences.

Numerous cases demonstrate the looming threat of judicial overreach; these cases are often considered some of the most damaging and injurious decisions in the history of the American federal judiciary. One potential solution is to appoint justices who will operate …

Legislative Reforms To End Lawfare By State And Local Prosecutors, Elizabeth Beske

Legislative Testimony & Comments

WASHINGTON, D.C. - The House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution and Limited Government will hold a hearing on Tuesday, March 4, 2025, at 2:00 p.m. ET. The hearing, "Legislative Reforms to End Lawfare by State and Local Prosecutors," will examine the use of lawfare tactics by the Biden-Harris Administration to weaponize the rule of law against political opponents. It will further highlight legislative reforms to end politically motivated state and local prosecutions.

The Great Writ Of Popular Sovereignty, William M.M. Kamin

Scholarly Articles

American habeas corpus, long conventionally known as the Great Writ of Liberty, is more properly understood as the Great Writ of Popular Sovereignty—a tool for We the People to insist that when our agents in government exercise our delegated penal powers, they remain faithful to our sovereign will. Once we grasp this conceptual shift, the implications for the law of habeas are profound.

In the past fifteen years, novel archival research has shown the Great Writ of Liberty’s founding myth to be ahistorical—that ideas about sovereignty, rather than individual liberty, drove the common-law writ’s development in the centuries of English …

Towards The Faa's Next Century: Clarifying Disclosure Requirements In Arbitration, Andrea K. Schneider, Brian Farkas

Articles

This essay provides a roadmap to the current landscape of neutrality and disclosure. It then suggests three possible reforms to the FAA that would provide better guidance to arbitrators, parties, and courts. Moreover, this essay argues that if the FAA cannot be sufficiently amended, states should take the lead. States can continue to more clearly outline disclosure requirements and enforce clearer standards than the current version of the FAA.

The Siren Song Of Territoriality, Robin J. Effron, Alan M. Trammell

Scholarly Articles

Territoriality—the theory that a state’s physical borders determine its power and sovereignty—boasts a long, venerable history. For centuries, it served as the dominant political theory for myriad ideas. It defined a wide range of doctrines, including personal jurisdiction, choice of law, and prescriptive jurisdiction. By the middle of the twentieth century, though, this rigid territoriality no longer described or responded to the challenges of a society that had grown increasingly mobile and interconnected. Courts replaced inflexible territorial theories with more functional theories rooted in fairness and state regulatory interests.

In recent years, territoriality has seen a curious resurgence. The Supreme …

The Rise And [?] Of Anti-Administrativism, Gary Lawson

UF Law Faculty Publications

Scholars have proclaimed the administrative state to be "Under Siege" or subject to a "Never-Ending Assault." Was the election of President Donald Trump on November 5, 2024 the sixth, if not yet the seventh, day around the walls? 

This seems an appropriate time to consider the present and future of opposition to the administrative state – something that has come to be dubbed "anti-administrativism." The first task, as is usually the case when one seeks intellectual clarity, is to figure out what one is talking about. What is this "anti-administrativism"? Without knowing the answer to that seemingly simple question, one …

Winding Authority: Consent By Registration And The Legal Singularity, Christina Frohock

Articles

More than forty years ago, the Pennsylvania legislature enacted a uniquely broad and explicit statute directed at out-of-state corporations: registration as a foreign corporation constitutes consent to general personal jurisdiction in the Commonwealth. Pennsylvania's consent-by-registration statute has faced Fourteenth Amendment due process challenges in state and federal courts alike, rising all the way to both the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania and the U.S. Supreme Court. This Article first tracks the myriad challenges to the Pennsylvania statute, culminating in the U.S. Supreme Court's opinion in Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co. in 2023. The Article then argues that the statute's zigzagging …

"Then What?": A Framework For Life Without Chevron, Gary Lawson

UF Law Faculty Publications

The Supreme Court overruled Chevron in Loper Bright Enterprises, Inc. v. Raimondo and Relentless, Inc. v. Dep’t of Commerce. What happens next? What should happen next?

This essay does not try to answer either of those important questions. Rather, it seeks to provide a framework to promote careful thinking about those questions. Specifically, any predictive or prescriptive account of the law governing judicial review of federal agency legal interpretations needs to think carefully about four issues.

First, what does “deference” actually mean in any given context? “Deference” can mean anything from polite respect to absolute obeisance, and everything in …

Federal Officer Criminal Case Removal, Jonathan R. Nash

Faculty Articles

Recent events have brought the federal officer removal statute to the fore. The statute allows a defendant to remove a criminal prosecution to federal court, provided that the allegedly criminal behavior was performed by the defendant as a federal officer under color of office and provided that the defendant has a federal defense. Current litigation has exposed several open, important questions under the statute, which this Article confronts. On the question of who qualifies as an “officer” who can remove under the statute, it argues that removal is available both to former officers and to presidents. On the question of …

Is Federal Question Jurisdiction Arising Or Setting, Lumen N. Mulligan

Faculty Works

In this essay, I respond to Professor Arthur D. Hellman. Hellman argues that "there is reason to be concerned that the [federal] judicial system falls short of the Framers' expectations--primarily by denying many litigants in cases presenting federal questions 'their real day in an Article III court,' but also by fostering 'balkanization' rather than uniformity in the interpretation of federal law." It is a privilege to comment upon Hellman's thoughtful piece. In doing so, I begin by questioning the value of originalist interpretations of Article III jurisdiction both descriptively and normatively. I then turn to an intra-originalist critique that paints …

Correcting Course: How Congress Can Streamline U.S. Engagement With The International Criminal Court, Sophia N. Ramcharitar

Cardozo Law Review de•novo

Since its participation in the 1998 Rome Conference, the United States has vocalized opposition to key components of the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) jurisdiction. This opposition has informed longstanding positions taken by the executive branch and motivated anti-ICC legislation passed by Congress. Support for the ICC’s investigation in Ukraine challenged these narratives across the legislative and executive branches, but the ICC’s arrest warrants of Israeli officials in 2024 renewed Congress’s heightened skepticism of the court and sowed political divisions on efforts to sanction the ICC. Congress’s oscillation on the ICC within the past several years prompts a larger question of …

The Purpose Of The Preliminary Injunction, Samuel Bray

Journal Articles

This Article explores a reshaping of the preliminary injunction that is occurring in the federal courts. A preliminary injunction is designed to be a "hold in place" order, blocking actions by the parties that would undermine the efficacy of the court's remedial options. But the preliminary injunction is becoming a device for accelerating the merits decision. Instead of a four-factor test for preliminary relief, increasingly there is one factor: the merits. This Article critiques this transformation, and it argues that the preliminary injunction should be recentered on the protection of the court's remedial options.

Loper Bright And The Great Writ, Anthony G. Amsterdam, James S. Liebman

Faculty Scholarship

Chevron deference is dead. The Court’s forty-year, seventy-decision experiment with Article-III-court deference to “reasonable” agency interpretations of ambiguous federal statutes failed, killed in part by concern that it unduly curbed the “judicial Power” to enforce the rule of law in the face of politics, partisanship, and mission-driven agency decision-making.

“AEDPA deference” lives. The Court’s twenty-five-year, seventy-two decision experiment with Article-III-court deference to “reasonable” state-court interpretations of the Constitution under the 1996 Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act continues to relegate criminal defendants to prison or death, notwithstanding federal habeas judges’ independent judgment that the state courts have misread or misapplied …

Rwu Law Alumni Newsletter December 2024, Roger Williams University School Of Law, Pbn Connect, Edward Fitzpatrick, Danna Lorch

RWU Law

No abstract provided.

Brief Amicus Curiae Of Federal Courts Professor Derek T. Muller In Support Of Defendant-Appellant, Daniel F. Mummolo, Christopher G. Michel, Rachel G. Frank, Derek T. Muller

Court Briefs

No. 23-7173
David O'Connell v. United States Conference of Catholic Bishops

On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia
1:20-cv-01365-JMC ∙ Honorable Jia M. Cobb

From the Introduction and Summary of Argument

The threshold question in this appeal is whether the Court has jurisdiction to hear it. The answer turns on the proper construction of 28 U.S.C. § 1291, which grants this Court jurisdiction over “appeals from all final decisions of the district courts.” In keeping with the provision’s text and history, both the Supreme Court and this Court have long understood Section 1291 to …

Oil And A Slippery Path To Conflict: Conocophillips, Guyana, And The Hostile Elephant In The Room, Vivian M. Williams

Publications and Research

The increasing involvement of States and their surrogates in cross-border commercial activities has heralded an urgent need for codification of the well-established public international law rule of sovereign immunity. The problem is particularly thorny in international arbitration when corporate entities seek to enlist the courts of one State to seize the property of another state to enforce an arbitral award. The complex nature of sovereign immunity in a globalized economy and the challenge it poses for courts in the Caribbean, was highlighted in enforcement proceeding brought by oil giant, ConocoPhillips against Venezuela’s State corporations. This article therefore discusses (a) the …