Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=2027635
 


 



The Invisibility of Jurisdictional Procedure and Its Consequences


Justin R. Pidot


University of Denver Sturm College of Law

March 22, 2012

64 Florida Law Review 1405 (2012)

Abstract:     
Modern standing doctrine has been the subject of substantial scholarly inquiry. Critics charge that it allows judges to resolve cases based on their own ideologies, favoring corporations over individuals and those who harm over those harmed. The doctrine likewise disserves social justice, preventing adjudication of indisputably meritorious claims. Yet the focus on the substance of standing doctrine has obscured an equally significant impediment to justice created by the procedures that judges use to adjudicate questions of standing and subject matter jurisdictional generally. The unusual dimensions of jurisdictional procedure have largely escaped notice. This Essay interrogates the history and context of jurisdictional procedure, offers an explanation for its invisibility, and identifies the consequences of that neglect.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 16

Keywords: federal courts, federal jurisdiction, standing, ripeness, mootness, subject matter jurisdiction, environment, public interest, climate change, adversarial system, inquisitorial system

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: March 24, 2012 ; Last revised: March 26, 2013

Suggested Citation

Pidot, Justin R., The Invisibility of Jurisdictional Procedure and Its Consequences (March 22, 2012). 64 Florida Law Review 1405 (2012). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2027635

Contact Information

Justin R. Pidot (Contact Author)
University of Denver Sturm College of Law ( email )
2255 E. Evans Avenue
Denver, CO 80208
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 317
Downloads: 23

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo7 in 0.250 seconds