Suchergebnisse
Filter
23 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
SSRN
SSRN
Federalism Limits on non-Article III Adjudication
In: Pepperdine Law Review, Forthcoming
SSRN
SSRN
Consenting to Adjudication Outside the Article III Courts
In: Vanderbilt Law Review, Forthcoming
SSRN
Cases, Controversies, and Diversity
Article III's diversity jurisdiction provisions extend the federal judicial power to state law controversies between different states or nations and their respective citizens. When exercising diversity jurisdiction, the federal judiciary does not function in its usual role of protecting federal interests or ensuring the uniformity of federal law. Instead, federal courts operate as alternative state courts for resolving disputes between diverse parties. But federal courts often cannot act as alternative state courts because of Article III justiciability doctrines such as standing, ripeness, and mootness. These doctrines define when a federal court may act. But they do not apply to state courts. Rather, states have developed their own justiciability doctrines that substantially diverge from the federal ones. The consequence is that federal courts sitting in diversity cannot hear many claims that can be brought in state court and can hear other claims that state courts lack the power to decide. This Article argues that, instead of applying federal justiciability doctrines, federal courts should apply state justiciability doctrines to state law cases brought under diversity jurisdiction. Following state justiciability doctrines would better achieve the goals of allowing federal courts to function as alternative state courts. Moreover, following state justiciability doctrines in state law cases would not undermine the rationales underlying federal justiciability doctrines because those doctrines were developed to limit the federal judiciary's ability to interfere with the other branches of the federal government— concerns that are inapplicable in state law disputes.
BASE
Spokeo v. Robins -- Brief of Public Law Professors as Amici Curiae in Support of Respondent
In: University of Utah College of Law Research Paper No. 133
SSRN
Working paper
SSRN
Cases, Controversies, and Diversity
In: Northwestern University Law Review, Forthcoming
SSRN
The Federalization of Airport Security: Privacy Implications
In: Whittier Law Review, Band 24, S. 43-69
SSRN
Standing, Injury in Fact, and Private Rights
In: Cornell Law Review, Forthcoming
SSRN
Against Associational Standing
In: University of Chicago Law Review, Forthcoming
SSRN
SSRN
Working paper
SSRN
State Standing to Constrain the President
In: Chapman Law Review, Forthcoming
SSRN