The Common Law of Federal Question Jurisdiction
F. Andrew Hessick
University of Utah - S.J. Quinney College of Law
May 21, 2009
Alabama Law Review, Vol. 60, 2009
The Supreme Court has repeatedly stressed that the role of the judiciary interpreting statutes is to declare the law as intended by Congress. But the Court historically has not followed that practice in interpreting the statute conferring federal question jurisdiction. The most notorious example is the well pleaded complaint rule, which the Court developed based on its own policy determinations about the appropriate role of the federal courts. In recent terms, the Court has developed various new doctrines expanding and contracting federal question jurisdiction without regard to Congressional intent. This Article contends that these recent developments reflect that, contrary to its statements about the proper role of the judiciary, the Court increasingly perceives itself as the primary regulator of federal question jurisdiction. The Article also contends that this practice has resulted in a highly manipulable and unstable law of federal question jurisdiction.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 57
Keywords: jurisdiction, federal question, supreme court, statutory interpretation, federal courtsAccepted Paper Series
Date posted: May 21, 2009
© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo6 in 0.406 seconds