The Invisibility of Jurisdictional Procedure and Its Consequences

16 Pages Posted: 24 Mar 2012 Last revised: 26 Mar 2013

Justin R. Pidot

University of Denver Sturm College of Law

Date Written: March 22, 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.

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

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: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2027635

Justin R. Pidot (Contact Author)

University of Denver Sturm College of Law ( email )

2255 E. Evans Avenue
Denver, CO 80208
United States

Paper statistics

Downloads
30
Abstract Views
450