Law 721 (41916)
Federal Courts
Syracuse University College of Law
Visiting Assistant Professor William C. Snyder
Spring 2018

Jump to: Lesson 23 for 4/25/18.

CHAPTER 1: The Federal Court System: Structure and Themes

A.  The Federal  Court  System in Historical Perspective  (p.1)

1.  The Federal Courts in the  Constitutional Generation  (p.1)

a.  The Articles of Confederation  (p.2)

b.  Establishing a National Court and Discretion for Congress to Create Lower Federal Courts  (p.3)

c.  A Limited Historical Record of the Framers' ''Original Intentions''

d.  Public Debates After the Constitutional Convention  (p.6)

e.  Ratification  (p.8)

f.  Judicial Federalism and the Continued Existence of State Courts

g.  The Judiciary Act of 1789  (p.9)

2.  The Development and Growth of the Federal Court System  (p.10)

B.  The Federal Courts Today (and Tomorrow)  (p.13)

1.  The Evolving Judicial Role  (p.14)

2.  Improving Federal Court Systems Through Judicial Independence

C.  Recurring Themes and Questions  (p.16)

1.  Federalism  (p.16)

2.  Separation of Powers  (p.17)

3.  Parity  (p.17)

4.  Judicial Review in the Context of Limited Jurisdiction  (p.18)

Marbury v. Madison  (p.20)

[Class did not meet as scheduled on 1/22/18.]

Assignment for Lesson 2 on 1/24/18, please read pp. 29-77.

CHAPTER 2: Justiciability and the Judicial Function  (p.29)

A.  A Reference Problem  (p.29)

B.  Context and Background  (p.31)

C.  The Law and Problems  (p.33)

1.  The Prohibition on Advisory Opinions  (p.33)

2.  Standing  (p.34)

a.  The Constitutional and Prudential Parameters of Standing  (p.35)

Clapper v. Amnesty International USA  (p.39)

Hollingsworth v. Perry  (p.52)

United States v. Windsor  (p.61)

Assignment for Lesson 3 on 1/29/18, please review Windsor and read pp. 77-101.

b.  Focus: Traditional Standing versus Special Solicitude Standing for States  (p.77)

c.  Classic Standing Analysis Revisited  (p.80)

d.  Focus: Generalized Grievance Prohibition and Standing as a Citizen  and Taxpayer  (p.81)

Hein v. Freedom from Religion  Foundation, Inc.  (p.82)

3.  Ripeness  (p.97)

Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner  (p.97)

Assignment for Lesson 4 on 1/31/18, please read pp. 101-125.

4.  Mootness  (p.101)

DeFunis v. Odegaard  104)

5.  Political Question  (p.109)

Nixon  v. United States  (p.110)

D.  Some Additional Problems  (p.123)

Assignment for Lesson 5 on 2/5/18, please read pp. 127-167. This is longer than normal on the assumption that all are already familiar with McCardle. We'll address this material by working problems 3-1 and 3-2 in class.

CHAPTER3: Congressional Control of Federal Jurisdiction and Decisionmaking

A.  A Reference Problem  (p.127)

B.  Context and Background  (p.130)

1.  Constitutional Text  (p.130)

2.  The Framers' Debate  (p.131)

3.  Interbranch Tension  (p.131)

4.  Competing Approaches to Congressional Jurisdictional Role  (p.132)

5.  The Role of Federalism  (p.133)

C.  The Law and Problems  (p.134)

1.  Control of Jurisdiction  (p.134)

a.  The Supreme Court's Appellate Jurisdiction  (p.136)

Ex parte McCardle  (p.136)

Ex parte Yerger  (p.140)

b.  The Inferior Federal Courts  (p.146)

Sheldon v. Sill  (p.147)

Yakus  v. United States  (p.150)

Battaglia v. General Motors Corp.  (p.158)

[Class did not meet as scheduled on 2/7/18.]

Assignment for Lesson 6 on 2/12/18, please read pp. 167-199.

2.  Control of Decisionmaking  (p.167)

United States v. Klein  (p.168)

Plaut v. Spendthrift Farm, Inc.  (p.175)

D.  Some Additional Problems  (p.195)

CHAPTER 4: Allocation of Jurisdiction to Non-Article  III Tribunals

A.  A Reference Problem  (p.199)

B.  Context and Background  (p.201)

C.  The Law and Problems  (p.203)

1.  Assignment of Judicial Business to Non-Article III Tribunals  (p.203)

Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co.

a.  Legislative or Article I Courts  (p.230)

b.  Article III Adjuncts  (p.235)

c.  Administrative Agencies  (p.237)

Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Schor  (p.240)

Stern v. Marshall  (p.254)

2.  Assignment of  Non-Article III  Matters  to Article III Courts  (p.273)

a.  Assignment of Non-Judicial Tasks to Article III Courts  (p.273)

b.  Assignment of the Adjudication of Cases to Article III Courts Outside the Scope of the Jurisdictional Grants in Article III, Section 2  (p.274)

D.  Some Additional Problems  (p.276)

Assignment for Lesson 7 on 2/14/18, please read pp. 279-305.

CHAPTER 5: ''Arising Under'' Jurisdiction

A.  A Reference Problem (p. 279)

B.  Context and Background  (p.281)

C.  The Law and Problems  (p.283)

1.  The Constitutional Scope of ''Arising Under'' Jurisdiction  (p.283)

a.  The Basic Rule  (p.283)

Osborn v. Bank of the United States  (p.283)

b.  Where Is the Constitutional Frontier?  (p.291)

Textile Workers Union of America v. Lincoln Mills of Alabama  (p.291)

2.  The Statutory Scope of ''Arising Under'' Jurisdiction  (p.299)

a.  Where (and How) to Look: The Well-Pleaded Complaint Rule  (p.300)

Louisville & Nashville Railroad Co. v. Mottley  (p.300)

Assignment for Lesson 8 on 2/19/18, please review pp. 300-305 abd read pp. 305-341.

b.  What  to Look For?  (p.305)

American Well Works Co. v. Layne & Bowler Co.  (p.305)

Grable & Sons Metal Products, Inc. v. Darue Engineering & Manufacturing  (p.313)

Gunn v. Minton  (p.319)

c.  Where (and How) to Look Redux: Declaratory Judgments  (p.330)

Franchise Tax Board of the State of California v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for Southern California  (p.331)

Assignment for Lesson 9 on 2/21/18, please review Chapter 5 and work all the problems in it. Recommend you attempt to chart the material in the chapter. Class will be a day of applying this material. Except to be called upon.

D.  Some Additional Problems  (p.342)

[Class did not meet as originally scheduled on 2/26/18.]

Assignment for Lesson 10 on 2/28/18, please read pp. 347-380.

CHAPTER 6: Diversity Jurisdiction

A.  A Reference Problem  (p.347)

B.  Context and Background  (p.349)

1.  Why Diversity Jurisdiction?  (p.349)

2.  Plan of Coverage  (p.351)

C.  The Law and Problems  (p.352)

1.  The Framers' Intent(s)  (p.352)

a.  Diversity to Protect Non-citizen Litigants: The ''Orthodox'' Interpretation

b.  Diversity to Restrain or Prevent the Application of State Law  (p.355)

c.  Diversity to Restrain the Jury:  New Insights  (p.358)

d.  A  Note  on Alienage Jurisdiction  (p.367)

2.  Implementation of Conventional Diversity Jurisdiction  (p.368)

3.  Evolution  in Diversity Doctrine  (p.371)

a.  Corporations and Diversity  (p.372)

b.  The Continuing Debate over the Value of Conventional Diversity Jurisdiction  (p.375)

Assignment for Lesson 11 on 3/5/18, please read pp. 380-400.

4.  Diversity Jurisdiction Receives New and  Controversial Life  (p.380)

a.  Multiparty,  Multiforum  Trial Jurisdiction Act  (p.381)

b.  Class Action Fairness Act of 2005  (p.385)

5.  In Search of Limits to Diversity Jurisdiction  (p.392)

D.  Some Additional Problems  (p.398)

Assignment for Lesson 12 on 3/7/18, please read pp. 401-429.

CHAPTER 7: Augmenting Federal Courts' Power Through the Exercise of Supplemental and Removal Jurisdiction

A.  A Reference Problem  (p.401)

B.  Context and Background  (p.403)

1.  Augmenting the Jurisdiction of Federal Trial Courts  (p.403)

2.  Plan of Coverage  (p.405)

a.  Supplemental Jurisdiction  (p.405)

b.  Removal Jurisdiction  (p.405)

C.  The Law and Problems  (p.406)

1.  Supplemental Jurisdiction  (p.406)

a.  The Constitutional Foundation of Supplemental Jurisdiction  (p.406)

United Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs  (p.408)

b.  The Emerging Importance of  Congressional Intent  (p.412)

Finley v. United States  (p.413)

c.  Congress Responds to the Court  (p.421)

d.  Integrating Supplemental Jurisdiction and Federal Procedural Rules

e.  Counterclaims and Supplemental Jurisdiction — a Constitutional Borderland?  (p.429)

Sparrow v. Mazda American Credit  (p.429)

f.  The Consequences of Dismissal Under Section 1367(c)  (p.441)

Assignment for Lesson 13 on 3/19/18, please read pp. [442-475].

Supplemental material:

Article "Attorneys for Trump and Cohen file to move Stormy Daniels lawsuit to federal court."

2.  Removal Jurisdiction  (p.442)

a.  Removal Under 28 U.S.C.  § 1441(a)  (p.444)

b.  Removal Under 28 U.S.C.  § 1441(c)  (p.446)

c.  Regulating the Removal of Diversity Actions  (p.448)

d.  Other Removal Statutes  (p.452)

D.  Some Additional Problems  (p.454)

Assignment for Lesson 14 on 3/21/18, please review pp. 457-475 & READ pp. 475-499.

CHAPTER 8: The  Eleventh Amendment  and State Sovereign Immunity

A.  A Reference Problem  (p.457)

B.  Context and Background (p.460)

C.  The Law and Problems  (p.462)

1.  The Foundations and Scope of Constitutional State Sovereign Immunity

a.  The Historical Backstory to Modern Doctrine  (p.462)

Hans v. Louisiana  (p.463)

b.  What Entities Are Entitled to Sovereign Immunity from Suit in Federal Court?  (p.475)

2.  Ways to Avoid State Sovereign Immunity from Suit in Federal Court  (p.476)

a.  The State: Waiver of Immunity and Consent to Suit  (p.477)

b.  The Plaintiff: Suits Against State Officials  (p.478)

Ex parte Young  (p.479)

Edelman v. Jordan  (p.489)

Assignment for Lesson 15 on 3/26/18, please READ pp. 499-532.

c.  The Congress: Abrogation of Immunity  (p.499)

Fitzpatrick v. Bitzer  (p.500)

Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida  (p.504)

Assignment for Lesson 16 on 3/28/18, please READ pp. 532-569.

3.  A Return to the Scope of Constitutional State Sovereign Immunity: Expansion and Some Surprising Retrenchment at the Dawn of the Twenty-First Century  (p.532)

Central Virginia Community College v. Katz  (p.534)

D.  Some Additional Problems  (p.547)

CHAPTER 9: The Special Case of Section 1983

A.  A Reference Problem  (p.553)

B.  Context and Background  (p.555)

1.  Recurring Themes and New Themes  (p.556)

2.  Plan of Coverage  (p.558)

C.  The Law and Problems  (p.559)

1.  When Do Violators of Federal Law Act ''Under Color of'' State Law?  (p.559)

Monroe v. Pape  (p.560)

Assignment for Lesson 17 on 4/2/18, please READ pp. 569-600.

2.  Under What Circumstances Are Individuals Sued Under Section  1983  Immune from Damages?  (p.569)

Harlow v. Fitzgerald  (p.570)

Anderson v. Creighton  (p.580)

3.  Under What Circumstances Are Individuals Sued Under Section 1983  Absolutely Immune from Suit?  (p.589)

Bogan v. Scott-Harris  (p.590)

Buckley v. Fitzsimmons  (p.595)

Assignment for Lesson 18 on 4/4/18, please READ pp.600-650, skipping opinions but not "DISCUSSION AND QUESTIONS" for Pembaur v. City of Cincinnati, City of St. Louis  v. Praprotnick, and City of Canton v. Harris.

4.  Under What Circumstances Are Government Entities Liable for Damages Under Section 1983?  (p.600)

Monell v. Department of Social Services  (p.602)

Pembaur v. City of Cincinnati (p. 614) [skip opinion but not "Discussion and Questions"]

City of St. Louis  v. Praprotnick  (p.621) [skip opinion but not "Discussion and Questions"]

City of Canton v. Harris  (p.627) [skip opinion but not "Discussion and Questions"]

5.  Which Constitutional Rights Are Enforceable Under Section 1983?  (p.635)

Zinermon v. Burch  (p.641)

Assignment for Lesson 19 on 4/9/18, please READ pp. 650 to the end of the chapter @670.

6.  Which Federal Statutory Rights Are Enforceable Under Section 1983?  (p.650)

Gonzaga University v. Doe (p. 653)

7.  When May a Party Recover Attorneys' Fees in a Section 1983 Suit?  (p.656)

Buckhannon Board & Care Home, Inc. v. West Virginia Department of Health &  Human Resources  (p.658)

8.  Does Section 1983 Law Vary When Applied by a State Court?  (p.665)

D.  Some Additional Problems  (p.667)

Assignment for Lesson 20 on 4/11/18, please READ pp. 671-701.

CHAPTER 10: Protecting State Courts from Interference by Federal Courts

A.  A Reference Problem  (p.671)

B.  Context and Background  (p.674)

1.  Tension in the Exercise of Jurisdiction by Federal and State Courts  (p.674)

2.  Plan of Coverage  (p.676)

C.  The Law and Problems  (p.677)

1.  The Anti-Injunction Act  (p.677)

a.  What the Act Prohibits  (p.678)

b.  Express Exceptions to the Act  (p.679)

Mitchum v. Foster  (p.680)

c.  Exceptions to the Act to Protect Federal Court Jurisdiction or Judgments  (p.684)

Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Co. v. Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers  (p.687)

2.  Pullman Abstention  692)

Railroad Commission of Texas v.  Pullman Company (p. 692)

England v. Louisiana State Board of  Medical Examiners  (p.697)

Assignment for Lesson 21 on 4/16/18, please READ pp. 701-748, skimming or skipping the actual opiniond of the Court, except for Younger, which should be read in full.

3.  Younger Abstention  (p.701)

Younger v. Harris  (p.701)

a.  Younger Abstention, Standing, and Anticipatory Federal Relief  (p.709)

Steffel v. Thompson  (p.709)

b.  Hicks v. Miranda and a ''Race to the Court''  (p.714)

c.  Younger's Impact on Federal Court Suits Seeking Damages  (p.718)

d.  Younger Abstention and State  Civil Proceedings  (p.719)

Trainor v. Hernandez  (p.722)

4.  Other Forms of Abstention  (p.734)

a.  ''Burford'' Abstention  (p.734)

b.  Colorado River Abstention  (p.736)

Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United States

5.  A Final Note on ''Full Faith and Credit''  (p.744)

D.  Some Additional Problems  (p.746)

Assignment for Lesson 22 on 4/18/18, please READ pp. 750-773.

CHAPTER 11: Federal Courts' Power to Make Federal Law

A.  A Reference Problem  (p.750)

B.  Context and Background  (p.751)

1.  The Common-Law Tradition in the Framers' Era  (p.751)

2.  The Political Struggle over the Role of Common Law in Early Federal Courts

3.  The Continuing Role for Common Law in Federal Courts  (p.755)

4.  Plan of Coverage  (p.757)

C.  The Law and Problems  (p.758)

1.  From  Swift to Erie  (p.758)

Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins  (p.763)

2.  Enclaves of Federal Common-Lawmaking Power Derived from Constitutional  Jurisdiction  and  Structure  (p.769)

a.  Admiralty  (p.770)

b.  Disputes Between States  (p.771)

c.  Foreign Relations  (p.772)

Assignment for Lesson 23 on 4/2325/18, please READ pp. 773-818 [likely with some redactions].

3.  An Enclave of Federal Common Law to Protect the Proprietary Interests of the United States  (p.773)

Clearfield Trust Co. v. United States  (p.774)

United States v. Kimbell Foods, Inc. (p. 779)

Boyle v. United Technologies Corp.  (p.790)

4.  Congressional Directives on Choosing the Applicable Rule of Decision  (p.799)

a.  Preempting, Saving, and Adopting State Law  (p.799)

b.  Express  Authorization  of  Federal Common Lawmaking  (p.800)

c.  Implied Authorization of Federal Common Lawmaking  (p.801)

5.  Federal Court Authority to Develop Remedial Provisions for the Enforcement of Federal Statutes  (p.804)

a.  Statutes of Limitation  (p.805)

b.  Implied  Causes of Action  (p.806)

6.  Federal Court Authority to Develop ''Constitutional Common Law'' Rules  (p.818)

a.  Before Bivens  (p.819)

b.  From  Bivens to Carlson  (p.821)

Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics  (p.821)

c.  The Contraction of Implied Constitutional Remedies After Carlson  (p.837)

Wilkie v. Robbins  (p.841)

d.  Concluding  Observations  on Bivens Remedies  (p.847)

D.  Some Additional Problems  (p.848)

CHAPTER 12: The Original Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and Appellate Jurisdiction in the Federal Courts

A.  A Reference Problem  (p.851)

B.  Context and Background  (p.853)

C.  The Law and Problems  (p.853)

1.  Supreme Court Original Jurisdiction  (p.853)

2.  Supreme  Court Appellate Review  (p.856)

a.  Review of Final Judgments of a State's Highest Court (p. 858)

Martin v. Hunter's Lessee (p. 859)

Cox Broadcasting Co. v. Cohn  (p.872)

Murdock v. City of Memphis (p. 882)

Michigan v. Long  (p.891)

b.  Review of Lower Federal Court Decisions  (p.899)

3.  Inferior Federal Courts and the Rooker-Feldman Doctrine  (p.900)

Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co.  (p.901)

District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman (p. 903)

D.  Some Additional Problems  (p.911)

Assignment for ONLINE Make-up Lesson 24 to be done prior to 4/2527/18, please READ pp. 913-919 and VIEW this presentation.

CHAPTER 13: Habeas Corpus

A.  A Reference Problem  (p.913)

B.  Context and Background  (p.916)

1.  English Historical  Origins and  Uses of the Writ  (p.916)

2.  Early American Experience  with  Habeas Corpus  (p.917)

3.  Chapter Goals and  Plan  of Coverage  (p.919)

C.  The Law and Problems  (p.919)

1.  Habeas Corpus and Federal Executive Detention  (p.921) [This topic is covered in other courses, most especially LAW 790 Counterterrorism Law. If interested, see lectures, slides and recordings here.]

a.  The 2004 Trilogy: Rasul, Padilla, and Hamdi  (p.922)

b.  2006: Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 548 U.S. 557 (2006)  (p.926)

c.  2008: Boumediene v. Bush, 553 U.S. 723 (2008)  (p.927)

Boumediene v. Bush  (p.927)

(T) Assignment for Lesson 25 on 4/27/18, please READ pp. 961-991.

2.  Habeas Corpus and State Court Detention  (p.961)

a.  Some Historical Background  (p.961)

b.  The Law Under AEDPA  (p.963)

Coleman v. Thompson  (p.972)

Teague v. Lane  (p.991)

Terry  Williams v. Taylor  (p.1010)

Michael  Williams v. Taylor  (p.1039)

D.  Some Additional Problems  (p.1056)

(T) Assignment for REVIEW SESSION Lesson 26 on 4/27/18, please READ pp. ***-***.

 

Recent Additions

Directory

Connect with us