Separability in the United States Supreme Court

U of Texas Law, Public Law Research Paper No. 102

Stockholm International Arbitration Review, Forthcoming

34 Pages Posted: 6 Jun 2006

See all articles by Alan Scott Rau

Alan Scott Rau

University of Texas at Austin - School of Law

Abstract

In a highly predictable decision - but one that is certain nevertheless to elicit considerable commentary - the Supreme Court of the United States has confirmed:

(1) The broad scope of the principle of the separability of the arbitration clause, and

(2) The broad scope of federal legislation overriding any rule of state law to the contrary.

It thus made explicit what should have been clear ever since the well-known case of Prima Paint decided almost 40 years ago: that the doctrine of severability - reserving issues of contract validity to the arbitrator unless the challenge is to the arbitration clause itself - is an integral part of the substantive federal common law of arbitration.

Nevertheless, the rather perfunctory, desultory discussion of the problem by Justice Scalia, or by his law clerk - and some unfortunate choice of language in the opinion - is likely to create continuing problems for lower courts that have routinely failed to grasp the point of the separability doctrine. This short paper is an attempt to rationalize the subject.

Keywords: arbitration, dispute resolution, separability, arbitrators and courts

JEL Classification: D74, F23, K12, K40, K41

Suggested Citation

Rau, Alan Scott, Separability in the United States Supreme Court. U of Texas Law, Public Law Research Paper No. 102, Stockholm International Arbitration Review, Forthcoming, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=893601

Alan Scott Rau (Contact Author)

University of Texas at Austin - School of Law ( email )

727 East Dean Keeton Street
Austin, TX 78705
United States

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
562
Abstract Views
3,098
Rank
90,713
PlumX Metrics