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)
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 systemAccepted Paper Series
Date posted: March 24, 2012 ; Last revised: March 26, 2013
© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo3 in 0.656 seconds