Cases Without Controversies: Uncontested Adjudication in Article III Courts

This book challenges the prevailing understanding of Article III of the U.S. Constitution by recounting the tradition of naturalization and other uncontested litigation in antebellum America and suggesting a constructive interpretive methodology that would allow the Supreme Court to take account of the old and the new in defining the contours of federal judicial power.

\n Format: Hardback
\n Length: 272 pages
\n Publication date: 21 September 2021
\n Publisher: Oxford University Press Inc
\n

This book delves into a novel exploration of the remarkable authority vested in federal courts in the United States to hear and decide uncontested applications seeking to assert or register a claim of right. These applications, known as voluntary or non-contentious jurisdiction in civil law countries, stand in contrast to the deeply entrenched commitment to adversary legalism in the United States. Modern accounts of federal judicial power frequently assert that the language of the Article III of the U.S. Constitution strictly confines federal courts to the adjudication of concrete disputes between adverse parties, effectively ruling out all forms of non-contentious jurisdiction. This assertion is often attributed to the so-called case-or-controversy requirement of Article III, which threatens the power of federal courts to conduct various familiar proceedings, including overseeing bankruptcy proceedings, issuing warrants, and adjudicating applications for mandamus and habeas corpus relief.

To challenge the prevailing understanding of Article III, this book traces the historical tradition of naturalization and other uncontested litigation in antebellum America. By juxtaposing this tradition with an account of the crucial distinction between cases and controversies, the book offers a fresh perspective on the scope of federal judicial power. Moreover, the book defends the power of federal courts to hear uncontested matters of federal law, while also examining how the Constitution's meaning has evolved over time. It proposes a constructive interpretive methodology that would enable the Supreme Court to reconcile the old and the new in defining the contours of federal judicial power.

In conclusion, this book provides a thought-provoking examination of the power of federal courts in the United States to hear and determine uncontested applications. By challenging the conventional understanding of Article III and offering a constructive interpretive framework, it sheds light on the evolving nature of federal judicial power and its implications for the legal landscape.

\n Weight: 556g\n
Dimension: 165 x 244 x 25 (mm)\n
ISBN-13: 9780197571408\n \n