Jurisdiction Commons^™

When Worlds Collide: Federal Construction Of State Institutional Competence, Marcia L. Mccormick

ExpressO

The federal courts routinely encounter issues of state law. Often a state court will have already analyzed the law at issue, either in a separate case or in the very situation before the federal court. In every one of those cases, the federal courts must decide whether to defer to the state court analysis and, if so, how much. The federal courts will often defer, but many times have not done so, and they rarely explain the reasons for the departures they make. While this lack of transparency gives the federal courts the greatest amount of discretion and power, it …

Certifying Questions To Congress, Amanda Frost

ExpressO

As many academics and some judges have openly admitted, no technique of statutory interpretation can settle every question of statutory ambiguity. Sometimes Congress enacts legislation containing gaps or inconsistencies that cannot be resolved through the application of a canon of construction or other interpretive rule. This article proposes an alternative approach for these hard cases. When a federal court is faced with a statute that leaves important issues about its application unclear – particularly issues that implicate the statute’s constitutionality – the court could stay the case and refer the question to Congress, much in the same way that courts …

An Emerging Uniformity For International Law, David H. Moore

ExpressO

The status of international law in the U.S. legal system has been hotly contested. Most international law scholars maintain that customary international law (CIL) is federal common law immediately applicable in federal courts. A minority of scholars has responded that CIL may be applied by federal courts only when authorized by the political branches. The Supreme Court’s decision in Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain, 124 S. Ct. 2739 (2004), stoked the debate. In Sosa’s wake, scholars have overwhelmingly concluded that the Supreme Court endorsed the majority view that CIL is federal common law.

This Article asserts that Sosa has been both misperceived …

Essay For The In-Print Symposium On The Myth Of Moral Justice, Stuart A. Scheingold

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

Stuart Scheingold responds to Thane Rosenbaum's The Myth of Moral Justice, agreeing with the aspiration to infuse law with moral imagination but critiquing Rosenbaum's oversight of existing moral energy within the legal profession, particularly through cause lawyering. Scheingold argues that Rosenbaum's approach is overly simplistic, failing to account for institutional obstacles and the contested nature of moral discourse, which can lead to conflict rather than harmony. He emphasizes that while moral advocacy, as seen in cause lawyering, can drive positive change, it also faces significant challenges and backlash.

Congressional Striptease: How The Failure Of The 108th Congress's Jurisdiction Stripping Bills Were Used For Political Success, Laura Fellow

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Remarks, Henry T. King Jr.

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

"Never Again" Promise Broken Again. Again. And Again., Kelly Dawn Askin

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

No Welcome Mat, No Problem?: Federal-Question Jurisdiction After Grable, Rory M. Ryan

ExpressO

For nearly 20 years, the Supreme Court’s federal-question jurisprudence was muddied after the Court’s decision in Merrell-Dow. Last term, the Court issued a much-needed clarification in Grable. But that clarification needs clarification. In this Article, Professor Ryan endeavors to provide a candid synthesis of what the law is after Grable. While this area is rich with debate about what the law should be, a candid post-Grable synthesis is needed both to guide courts and to provide a common ground for these debates. Even such a modest task, however, is formidable. Federal-question jurisdiction is not a concept that can be viewed …

Brief For Petitioner Salim Ahmed Hamdan, Hamdan V. Rumsfeld, No. 05-184 (U.S. Jan. 6, 2006), Neal K. Katyal

U.S. Supreme Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

Jurisdiction To Adjudicate: A Revised Analysis, A. Benjamin Spencer

Scholarly Articles

Personal jurisdiction doctrine as articulated by the Supreme Court is in disarray.A s a constitutional doctrine whose contours remain imprecise, the law of personal jurisdiction has generated confusion, unpredictability, and extensive satellite litigation over what should be an uncomplicated preliminary issue. Many commentators have long lamented these defects, making suggestions for how the doctrine could be improved. Although many of these proposals have had much to offer, they generally have failed to articulate (or adequately justify or explain) a simple and sound approach to jurisdiction that the Supreme Court can embrace. This Article revises the law of personal jurisdiction by …

Jurisdiction And The Internet: Returning To Traditional Principles To Analyze Network-Mediated Contacts, A. Benjamin Spencer

Scholarly Articles

Courts have been evaluating the issue of personal jurisdiction based on Internet or "network-mediated" contacts for some time. The U.S. Supreme Court has remained silent on this issue, permitting the federal appeals courts to develop standards for determining when personal jurisdiction based on network-mediated contacts is appropriate. Unfortunately, the circuit approaches - which emphasize a website's "interactivity" and "target audience" - are flawed because they are premised on an outdated view of Internet activity as uncontrollably ubiquitous. This view has led courts to depart from traditional jurisdictional analysis and impose elevated and misguided jurisdictional standards. This Article argues that courts …

The Hybrid Class Action As Judicial Spork: Managing Individual Rights In A Stew Of Common Wrong, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 231 (2006), Jon Romberg

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Blue Mourning: Postpartum Psychosis And The Criminal Insanity Defense, Waking To The Reality Of Women Who Kill Their Children, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 515 (2006), Jessica Butterfield

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

In The Service Of Secrets: The U.S. Supreme Court Revisits Totten, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 475 (2006), Douglas Kash, Matthew Indrisano

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Negligent Infliction Of Emotional Distress: Recovery Is Foreseeable, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1019 (2006), Jeffrey Hoskins

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reconceptualizing Federalism, Erwin Chemerinsky

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Enforcing The Avena Decision In U.S. Courts, Curtis A. Bradley

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Jurisdiction Stripping In Three Acts: A Three String Serenade, Caprice L. Roberts

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

The Military Commission In The War On Terrorism, Haridimos V. Thravalos

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Enforcement Of Arbitral Awards Against Foreign States Or State Agencies, S. I. Strong

Faculty Publications

Britain's Lord Denning once said that “as a moth is drawn to the light, so is a litigant drawn to the United States.” Certainly, as a pro-arbitration state and a signatory to various international conventions concerning the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards, the United States seems a natural place to bring an action to enforce an arbitral award against a foreign state or state agency. However, suing a sovereign has not traditionally been a simple task in the United States or elsewhere. Most nations grant foreign states the presumption of immunity, thus denying that their domestic courts have jurisdiction to …

Convicting The Innocent: Aberration Or Systemic Problem?, Rodney J. Uphoff

Faculty Publications

In practice, the right to adequate defense counsel in the United States is disturbingly unequal. Only some American criminal defendants actually receive the effective assistance of counsel. Although some indigent defendants are afforded zealous, effective representation, many indigent defendants and almost all of the working poor are not. The quality of representation a defendant receives generally is a product of fortuity, of economic status, and of the jurisdiction in which he or she is charged. For many defendants, the assistance of counsel means little more than counsel's help in facilitating a guilty plea. With luck, money, and location primarily determining …

Two Paradigms Of Jurisdiction, Ralf Michaels

Michigan Journal of International Law

Globalization causes convergence of legal orders. Or so it is argued. Law and economics scholars predict that legal orders will move towards the same efficient end state. They argue that the requirements of globalization will pressure legal orders to converge on the level of economic efficiency, because regulatory competition between legal orders makes it impossible for individual legal systems to maintain suboptimal solutions. Many comparative lawyers predict a similar convergence. In particular traditional functionalist comparatists have long held that unification of law was both desirable and unavoidable. Their basic argument is based on functional equivalence and can be summarized as …

History Turned "Sideways": Granholm V. Heald And The Twenty-First Amendment, Harris Danow

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Communications Policy For 2006 And Beyond, Reed H. Hundt, Gregory L. Rosston

Federal Communications Law Journal

In this Article, the Authors propose sweeping changes to the current telecommunications regulatory regime. With impending reform in telecommunications laws, the Authors argue that an important first step is the creation of a bipartisan, independent commission to examine and recommend implementation of more market-oriented communications policy. Through maximizing the operation of the markets, the authors argue that communications policy will better serve its goals of increasing business productivity and consumer welfare through the better services and lower prices. Important steps to achieve optimal market operation include deregulating retail prices where multifirm competition is available, minimizing the cost of public property …

Transnational Regulatory Litigation, Hannah Buxbaum

Articles by Maurer Faculty

Recent years have seen much debate about the role of national courts in addressing global harms. That debate has focused on the application by domestic courts of international law - for instance, in civil actions brought in U.S. courts to enforce human rights law. This article identifies a parallel development in the area of economic regulation. It classifies and analyzes a category of cases that seek the application of regulatory law by domestic courts in situations involving global economic misconduct. Like the public international law cases, these cases highlight the tension between the benefits to be gained by enhanced enforcement …

What Is Rehnquist Federalism?, Marci A. Hamilton

Articles

No abstract provided.

Is Multidistrict Litigation A Just And Efficient Consolidation Technique? Using Diet Drug Litigation As A Model To Answer This Question, Danielle Oakley

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Sovereignty, Not Due Process: Personal Jurisdiction Over Nonresident, Alien Defendants, Austen L. Parrish

Articles by Maurer Faculty

The Due Process Clause with its focus on a defendant's liberty interest has become the key, if not only, limitation on a court's exercise of personal jurisdiction. This due process jurisdictional limitation is universally assumed to apply with equal force to alien defendants as to domestic defendants. With few exceptions, scholars do not distinguish between the two. Neither do the courts. Countless cases assume that foreigners have all the rights of United States citizens to object to extraterritorial assertions of personal jurisdiction.

But is this assumption sound? This Article explores the uncritical assumption that the same due process considerations apply …

Ninth Circuit Upholds The Corps' Adjacency Jurisdiction Over Wetlands, Jonathan Lew

Sea Grant Law Fellow Publications

No abstract provided.

Merrill Lynch V. Dabit: Federal Preemption Of Holders' Class Actions, Mark J. Loewenstein

Publications

No abstract provided.