Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Courts (101)
- Constitutional Law (97)
- Jurisprudence (84)
- Judges (81)
- Supreme Court of the United States (81)
-
- Civil Procedure (80)
- Criminal Law (74)
- Litigation (73)
- Legislation (72)
- State and Local Government Law (71)
- International Law (70)
- Legal History (70)
- Conflict of Laws (69)
- Law and Politics (68)
- Law and Society (68)
- Legal Remedies (68)
- Public Law and Legal Theory (68)
- Administrative Law (67)
- Criminal Procedure (67)
- Rule of Law (67)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (64)
- Common Law (64)
- Comparative and Foreign Law (64)
- Environmental Law (64)
- Torts (64)
- Dispute Resolution and Arbitration (63)
- Fourteenth Amendment (63)
- President/Executive Department (63)
- Institution
-
- Seattle University School of Law (58)
- University of Maine School of Law (10)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (8)
- American University Washington College of Law (7)
- Fordham Law School (7)
-
- The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law (6)
- Brooklyn Law School (5)
- Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law (4)
- Mississippi Christian University School of Law (3)
- Pepperdine University (3)
- University of Michigan Law School (3)
- Brigham Young University Law School (2)
- Columbia Law School (2)
- Notre Dame Law School (2)
- Schulich School of Law, Dalhousie University (2)
- Texas A&M University School of Law (2)
- University of Florida Levin College of Law (2)
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (2)
- William & Mary Law School (2)
- Chicago-Kent College of Law (1)
- Emory University School of Law (1)
- George Fox University (1)
- Liberty University (1)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (1)
- Osgoode Hall Law School of York University (1)
- Penn State Dickinson Law (1)
- Roger Williams University (1)
- The University of Akron (1)
- University of Arkansas, Fayetteville (1)
- University of Central Florida (1)
- Keyword
-
- Jurisdiction (15)
- Personal jurisdiction (7)
- Discrimination (5)
- Federalism (5)
- Judicial review (5)
-
- Securities and exchange commission (5)
- Standing (5)
- Addiction (4)
- Article III (4)
- Artificial intelligence (4)
- Civil procedure (4)
- Constitution (4)
- ESG (4)
- Federal courts (4)
- Public health (4)
- Regulation (4)
- Constitutional law (3)
- Corporate (3)
- Courts (3)
- General jurisdiction (3)
- Judicial power (3)
- Legislation (3)
- Sec (3)
- Separation of powers (3)
- Shareholder (3)
- Antitrust (2)
- Arbitration (2)
- Chevron (2)
- Climate change (2)
- Colonization (2)
- Publication
-
- Seattle University Law Review (58)
- Maine Law Review (8)
- Northwestern University Law Review (8)
- Fordham Law Review (7)
- Catholic University Law Review (5)
-
- Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law (4)
- American University Law Review (3)
- Articles (3)
- Faculty Scholarship (3)
- MC Law Review (3)
- Pepperdine Law Review (3)
- BYU Law Review (2)
- Dalhousie Journal of Legal Studies (2)
- Michigan Law Review (2)
- Ocean and Coastal Law Journal (2)
- Scholarly Articles (2)
- UF Law Faculty Publications (2)
- 2025 Event Invitations (1)
- Akron Law Review (1)
- American University Business Law Review (1)
- American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law (1)
- Amicus Briefs & Court Filings (1)
- Arkansas Law Review (1)
- Articles & Book Chapters (1)
- Articles by Maurer Faculty (1)
- Brooklyn Journal of International Law (1)
- Cardozo International & Comparative Law Review (1)
- Cardozo Law Review de•novo (1)
- Chicago-Kent Law Review (1)
- Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present) (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 30 of 147
Full-Text Articles in Jurisdiction
The Inconvenience Doctrine, Alexi Pfeffer-Gillett
The Inconvenience Doctrine, Alexi Pfeffer-Gillett
BYU Law Review
In a nation of stark inequalities, the Roberts Court is often portrayed as siding with the wealthy and powerful. Many scholars argue that the Court has abandoned legal principles altogether and instead simply chooses winners and losers based on the conservative majority’s political agenda. Meanwhile, scholarly examinations of the legal reasoning underlying the Court’s most impactful decisions are largely confined to specific subject areas. Such compartmentalized analyses, though, overlook broader patterns in the Court’s rulings that transcend substantive legal boundaries.
This Article bridges the gap in these parallel conversations by connecting the Roberts Court’s reasoning across many legal fields with …
Standing In The Dark, Sharon Brett
Standing In The Dark, Sharon Brett
BYU Law Review
Demonstrating standing for injunctive relief in § 1983 police misconduct cases is undisputedly difficult for civil rights plaintiffs. Under City of Los Angeles v. Lyons, plaintiffs seeking injunctions must present more than evidence of past misconduct; they must show a significant ongoing risk that they will experience the same misconduct again. Scholarly attention to Lyons has focused primarily on doctrinal errors in the Court’s legal analysis, and for good reason. But the case raises another important yet overlooked question: Can civil rights plaintiffs realistically demonstrate risk of future harm given (a) the limited data kept by law enforcement about their …
Rules Of Decision, Judicial Power, And The Valid Rule Requirement, John Harrison
Rules Of Decision, Judicial Power, And The Valid Rule Requirement, John Harrison
Catholic University Law Review
Some current Supreme Court debates that concern seemingly specialized issues raise fundamental questions about the role of the Constitution in the legal system and the role of the courts when they decide constitutional issues. In recent years, Justice Thomas has suggested that the doctrines of First Amendment overbreadth, so-called third-party standing in cases involving constitutional liberty, and statutory inseverability call on federal courts to exceed their role under Article III. Justice Thomas maintains that when courts apply those doctrines, the courts decide cases not before them. Building on the work of Professor Henry Monaghan, this article argues that those concerns …
Facial Challenges, Remedies, And The Judicial Power, Natalie R. Schmidt
Facial Challenges, Remedies, And The Judicial Power, Natalie R. Schmidt
Catholic University Law Review
The Supreme Court has long maligned facial, as opposed to as-applied, challenges to the constitutionality of statutes, warning that they are disfavored and difficult to win. But recently, in his separate opinion in Moody v. NetChoice, LLC, Justice Thomas has launched a stronger attack: facial challenges are improper exercises of the judicial power. Facial challenges, he asserted, require courts to go beyond the case or controversy before them, improperly distort standing doctrine, and thus violate Article III of the U.S. Constitution.
This Symposium Piece addresses Justice Thomas’s charge head on, arguing that facial challenges do not implicate the judicial …
Rethinking Judicial Power & Remedial Restraint, Caprice L. Roberts
Rethinking Judicial Power & Remedial Restraint, Caprice L. Roberts
Catholic University Law Review
This Article maintains that groundbreaking Supreme Court cases reshaping judicial power and restraint are frequently remedies centric. The much- anticipated ruling in Trump v. CASA illustrates this correlation. Interpreting traditional equity, the Supreme Court circumscribed federal judicial power to issue universal relief. The Court relied on Marbury v. Madison to bolster its reasoning on the limits of judicial power. Ironically, both cases denied any remedy while enhancing the potential for future judicial power. Whether via judicial review and supremacy power or the Court’s future ability to now be the only federal court able to issue universal remedies—the Court’s role in …
Disregarding Severability, Kevin C. Walsh
Disregarding Severability, Kevin C. Walsh
Catholic University Law Review
The infirmities of severability doctrine have elicited increased attention at the Supreme Court. In his application of severability doctrine for a five-Justice majority in United States v. Arthrex, Inc., Chief Justice Roberts began to reformulate the doctrine in a way that can free the Court from the misleading mental imagery conjured by the conception of courts as “severing” provisions from a statute. Roberts's reformulation more properly depicts the relevant judicial activity to be judicial disregard of statutory rules to avoid unconstitutional applications of law rather than judicial severance of textual provisions to fix a problem that inheres in the …
Fifth Circuit And Mississippi Law: Asked And Answered (Or Not), Caroline B. Smith, Emily K. Lindsay, Jim Rosenblatt
Fifth Circuit And Mississippi Law: Asked And Answered (Or Not), Caroline B. Smith, Emily K. Lindsay, Jim Rosenblatt
MC Law Review
No abstract provided.
What's Appealing In Mississippi?, Virginia C. Carlton
What's Appealing In Mississippi?, Virginia C. Carlton
MC Law Review
No abstract provided.
Federal Courts, Class Actions, And The Jurisdictional Void, Courtney T. Welch
Federal Courts, Class Actions, And The Jurisdictional Void, Courtney T. Welch
Fordham Law Review
To invoke the jurisdiction of a federal court, a plaintiff must satisfy the requirements of Article III. Among other things, Article III requires a plaintiff to have and maintain personal stake throughout the lifespan of the litigation. Though a simple premise, this constitutional requirement has a complicated history. This is especially true as applied to class action lawsuits, where plaintiffs bring claims both on behalf of themselves and other harmed individuals.
The U.S. Supreme Court has applied flexible rules to some—but not all—of Article III’s requirements in class actions. The breadth of this flexibility, though, is uncertain. Accordingly, so too …
Auer Deference: He Who Writes The Law Must Not Adjudge Its Violation, William G. Kennedy
Auer Deference: He Who Writes The Law Must Not Adjudge Its Violation, William G. Kennedy
MC Law Review
This Comment explores Auer deference and its application to the Sentencing Guidelines, the Sentencing Commission, and its commentary. Auer deference, in its simplest form, requires courts to give controlling weight to an agency’s interpretation of its own regulations unless it is plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation. Following the Court’s decision in Kisor—expressly limiting Auer’s application, the circuit courts have disagreed on the applicability of Auer to the Sentencing Commission’s commentary regarding career offender designation. This disagreement begs for an appearance before the Court of Last Resort, but until that day, the courts must rigidly apply Kisor to …
Frankenstein Sinatra: The Argument For A Federal Postmortem Right Of Publicity In The Ai-Era, Ian Samide
Frankenstein Sinatra: The Argument For A Federal Postmortem Right Of Publicity In The Ai-Era, Ian Samide
Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law
Artificial Intelligence has fundamentally revolutionized the way media is generated and presents new and unique threats to the right of publicity. By enabling users to create high-quality, realistic deep fakes of individuals’ voices, images, or likenesses, Artificial Intelligence has created novel risks to the right of publicity. Additionally, right of publicity is currently governed by state law. This system is proving to be flawed in the internet age, as content is rarely confined to a single jurisdiction, resulting in unpredictability and juridical disputes. This note argues that a federal right of publicity is necessary to regulate Artificial Intelligence effectively and …
Nonparty Protective Relief In The Early Republic: Judicial Power To Annul Letters Patent, James E. Pfander, Mary E. Zakowski
Nonparty Protective Relief In The Early Republic: Judicial Power To Annul Letters Patent, James E. Pfander, Mary E. Zakowski
Northwestern University Law Review
Much of the debate over the constitutionality of universal or nonparty protective relief in the federal court system has focused on lessons drawn from historical practice. But with its emphasis on injunctive relief, the literature has largely ignored forms of adjudication that arose outside the courts of equity and led to judgments and decrees affecting the rights of nonparties. As a result, the story of nonparty protective relief has not yet been fully told.
This Article offers a more complete story, highlighting proceedings in which federal courts issued judgments that settled a matter once and for all. Some familiar examples …
Investigating The Relationship Between Noun Classes And Plant Folk Taxonomy In Chasu Language Of Kilimanjaro Region In Tanzania, Peter Rabson Mziray
Investigating The Relationship Between Noun Classes And Plant Folk Taxonomy In Chasu Language Of Kilimanjaro Region In Tanzania, Peter Rabson Mziray
Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences
The current study investigates the relationship between noun classes and plant folk taxonomy in Chasu (G 22). The study focuses on two objectives: the first objective is to describe the plant folk taxonomy in Chasu and the second objective is to determine the relationship between noun classes and plant folk taxonomy in Chasu. Data were collected from rural villages in Same and Mwanga districts by using free listing, field interviews (jungle-walk-and-identify), and written texts containing Chasu plant names. The findings reveal that Chasu folk taxonomy reflects different ethnobotanical categories; including a unique beginner which is mmea/mimea ‘plant(s)’, and three life …
Habeas Corpus And Void Judgments, David Kinnaird
Habeas Corpus And Void Judgments, David Kinnaird
Notre Dame Law Review
In a string of recent opinions, Justice Gorsuch and Justice Thomas have posited that postconviction relief upon a writ of habeas corpus was historically unavailable except where the judgment of conviction was issued by a court lacking jurisdiction. In light of this history, Justices Gorsuch and Thomas have argued for a reconsideration of the modern scope of the writ, which generally allows for relitigation of alleged constitutional error in the course of criminal trial.
This Article argues that Justices Gorsuch and Thomas have the history half right. They are correct to assert that a valid judgment of conviction was a …
Competition, Comity, And Confusion: Reconciling The Ftaia’S Import Exclusion With Its Direct Effects Provision, Elliot Lam
Fordham Law Review
The debate surrounding the Sherman Act’s extraterritorial scope represents a tension between two competing objectives: protecting the U.S. economy from foreign anticompetitive conduct on one hand and respecting the sovereign authority of other nation-states on the other. Applying U.S. law abroad risks undermining sovereign authority by regulating foreign economies, though such regulation appears necessary in some cases to protect U.S. consumers.
Congress’s attempt to square these objectives through enacting the Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act of 1982 (FTAIA) failed to settle the matter. The statute left courts with two new questions: how to distinguish “import” from “nonimport” commerce, and how …
Defining “Cases” Or “Controversies”: A Fundamental Confusion In Article Iii Standing Doctrine And Its Consequences In Multi-Plaintiff Litigation, Dominic Signa
Fordham Law Review
The United States Supreme Court has addressed the absolute core requirements of standing under Article III of the U.S. Constitution on several occasions. However, the Court has not clearly articulated what purpose standing serves relative to Article III’s limitations on the exercise of judicial power to only “cases” or “controversies,” and this has led to major downstream effects in the realm of multi plaintiff litigation. Specifically, the Court has not explained whether standing is meant to ensure (1) that all potential plaintiffs demonstrate that they are properly parties to the same case or controversy before a federal court or (2) …
Critical Approaches To Jurisdiction: The Struggle For Control Of Indigenous Lands And Resources, Dayna Scott
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 P. George
Chimeric Contacts And Consent: The Ill-Reasoned Expansion Of Corporate Jurisdictional Exposure, James P. George
William & Mary Business Law Review
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 …
Chimeric Contacts And Consent: The Ill-Reasoned Expansion Of Corporate Jurisdictional Exposure, James Paul George
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 …
Living Property, Joseph William Singer
Living Property, Joseph William Singer
Seattle University Law Review
The Supreme Court has increasingly defined property rights that are per se exempt from regulation in the absence of compensation, most recently in Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid (2021) and Tyler v. Hennepin County (2023). The Court claims that it can identify property rights that are categorically protected from regulation by reference to history, tradition, and precedent. Yet this approach is oddly ahistorical; it is inconsistent with the fact that property law changed dramatically over U.S. history, as well as varying tremendously among the states. It is also inconsistent with the historical context of the Founding era. At that time, …
The Roots Of Credit Inequality, Andrea Freeman
The Roots Of Credit Inequality, Andrea Freeman
Seattle University Law Review
Debt oppression began before the United States became a country. Settlers enslaved Africans and Indigenous people, treating them as property that they could buy and sell for their economic and personal benefit. When enslavement became illegal, new economic systems and laws that included sharecropping, Black Codes, and Jim Crow kept Black people in servitude. Laws that prohibited enslaved people from owning property or selling goods to white people evolved into restrictions on Black people’s occupations and market participation, both formal and informal. When Black entrepreneurs overcame these obstacles and built wealth within Black business enclaves, white people enforced their racist …
“A Plain Denial”: Reclaiming Equal Protection In American Juvenile Law, Addie C. Rolnick, David S. Tanenhaus, Justin Iverson, Danielle L. Silvestri
“A Plain Denial”: Reclaiming Equal Protection In American Juvenile Law, Addie C. Rolnick, David S. Tanenhaus, Justin Iverson, Danielle L. Silvestri
Seattle University Law Review
Juvenile courts are based on the premise that children are different from adults and should therefore be treated differently. Children may be treated more informally by courts, punished for different purposes, and brought before the court for different behaviors. Since In re Gault, the Supreme Court has been clear that there are limits to how different juvenile courts can be. Juveniles are entitled to many of the same procedural protections as adult criminal defendants, although the Court has preserved some procedural differences where it has determined that their benefit is outweighed by the need to preserve the informality, flexibility, …
Redefining Section 230 Immunity, Lucas Dini
Redefining Section 230 Immunity, Lucas Dini
Seattle University Law Review
Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act has provided broad immunity to online platforms for third-party content which was the foundation for the internet's growth. However, the rise in the use of artificial intelligence (AI) to produce algorithms to curate content to users of online services has blurred the line between being a passive host of third party content and active editorial control. This Note examines the legal, policy, and constitutional implications of applying Section 230 immunity to platforms that use AI to curate and promote third-party content. This analysis argues that algorithmic promotion of third-party content constitutes a platform's …
Overcrowding The System: Rethinking Juvenile Justice In Washington State, Mckenna White
Overcrowding The System: Rethinking Juvenile Justice In Washington State, Mckenna White
Seattle University Law Review
The recent crisis at Green Hill School highlights the detrimental consequences of severe overcrowding in Washington State’s Juvenile Rehabilitation system—a problem exacerbated by the implementation of the JR to 25 legislation. This Note argues that the juvenile rehabilitation system, which is currently struggling to manage a wide age range of offenders, necessitates a fundamental rethinking of juvenile justice practices. By examining neurological research indicating continued brain development into the mid-twenties, along with the high prevalence of trauma among justice-involved youth, this Note proposes the creation of a dedicated third system of care within the Department of Children, Youth, and Families …
Addressing The Root Of Housing Insecurity: Washington Should Divest From “Crime-Free” Housing Programs, Sarah Cerdena
Addressing The Root Of Housing Insecurity: Washington Should Divest From “Crime-Free” Housing Programs, Sarah Cerdena
Seattle University Law Review
Crime-Free Rental Housing Properties (CFRHPs) have proven to be an ineffective and inequitable approach to public safety. Often, tenants in these properties are evicted—at times, extrajudicially—as a result of conduct that does not rise to violations of their lease provisions, much less criminal behavior. By placing extraordinary power in the hands of local law enforcement to carry out these ordinances, CFRHPs predictably pose significant harm to Black and Latinx communities, survivors of domestic violence, disabled tenants, and low-income tenants generally. Recently, the Washington State Supreme Court grappled with the tensions arising between CFRHPs and the enforcement of Washington landlord-tenant law. …
Esg Investing Breaches Erisa Fiduciary Duties? A Closer Look At Spence V. American Airlines, Inc., Eric Chin-Ru Chang
Esg Investing Breaches Erisa Fiduciary Duties? A Closer Look At Spence V. American Airlines, Inc., Eric Chin-Ru Chang
Seattle University Law Review
In Spence v. American Airlines, Inc., the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas found that American Airlines breached its fiduciary duties due to BlackRock’s ESG investing practices. Contrary to some reports suggesting that the ruling prohibits ESG investing under ERISA, a closer look at the ruling shows that the court only targeted American Airlines’ failure to manage conflicts of interest appropriately, rather than the legality of ESG investing itself. In light of the intensifying ESG backlash in the United States, this Article cautions against further restrictive measures on ESG investing. Such measures would exacerbate the widening …
Mandating Fluoride: A Constitutional Exercise Of Police Power, Anita Jahangiri
Mandating Fluoride: A Constitutional Exercise Of Police Power, Anita Jahangiri
Seattle University Law Review
This Note addresses the ongoing debate over fluoridation: the regulation of fluoride levels in public water systems. Extensive research indicates fluoridation, when regulated at the recommended concentration, is both safe and highly effective in preventing dental caries. Better known as cavities, dental caries is a preventable yet widespread health issue that disproportionately affects low-income populations. Reducing dental health disparities among economic classes is a pressing public health issue. Fluoridation is not merely a policy option, but a critical, proven tool to address such disparities and uphold the collective welfare of Washingtonians. This Note focuses on fluoridation as a public health …
Neurodiversity In The Courtroom: Expanding Jury Service Accessibility Beyond Physical Disability, Samantha L. Mabe
Neurodiversity In The Courtroom: Expanding Jury Service Accessibility Beyond Physical Disability, Samantha L. Mabe
Seattle University Law Review
The Americans with Disabilities Act has required equal access to jury service for decades; however, efforts to accommodate jurors with disabilities have been slow to develop beyond some minor accommodations for physical disabilities. While neurodivergent people frequently struggle to navigate a world catered toward neurotypical people, jury service remains inaccessible for many neurodivergent people who need accommodations to attend trial and engage in jury deliberations. If courts and advocates do not consider how to develop accommodations to secure the service of neurodivergent jurors, they will miss out on the unique skillsets that neurodivergent people can bring to resolving disputes.
Disabled …