Download this Paper Open PDF in Browser

Brief of Professor Aditya Bamzai as Amicus Curiae in Support of Neither Party, Dalmazzi et al. v. United States

54 Pages Posted: 21 Nov 2017 Last revised: 2 Dec 2017

Aditya Bamzai

University of Virginia - School of Law

Date Written: November 14, 2017

Abstract

This amicus brief in support of neither party explains why the Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction to review cases from the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces ("CAAF"). Though called a "court" by statute, the CAAF is located for constitutional purposes within the Executive Branch and does not exercise the "judicial Power" of the United States or of any sovereign. Chief Justice Marshall's opinion in Marbury v. Madison makes it clear that the Supreme Court cannot exercise "appellate Jurisdiction" under Article III directly from an officer of the Executive Branch. There is no basis in law or logic to distinguish between a single officer (James Madison in Marbury) and a body composed of multiple officers (the CAAF), even if the latter is designated a "court" by statute. Accordingly, the Court's exercise of jurisdiction over cases directly from the CAAF violates Article III. The brief canvasses a number of precedents in this area arising from cases involving military commissions, the Court of Federal Claims, petitions for writs of habeas corpus, the Court of Customs and Patent Appeals, and administrative agencies.

Keywords: Federal courts, administrative law, non-Article III adjudication, Marbury v. Madison, Oil States, Stern v. Marshall, Dalmazzi

Suggested Citation

Bamzai, Aditya, Brief of Professor Aditya Bamzai as Amicus Curiae in Support of Neither Party, Dalmazzi et al. v. United States (November 14, 2017). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3073397

Aditya Bamzai (Contact Author)

University of Virginia - School of Law ( email )

580 Massie Road
Charlottesville, VA 22903
United States

Paper statistics

Downloads
121
Rank
202,766
Abstract Views
424