Reader Ad Slot
Reader Ad Slot placeholder
If you would like to support SpookStack without paying out of pocket, please consider allowing advertising cookies. It helps cover hosting costs and keeps the archive free to browse. You can change this choice at any time.
Supreme Court — Part 18
Page 84
84 / 129
~
ET ae ie tat ied Se
In short, there is little gained by continuing the present
obligatory burden and much to be gained (and little, if anything,
to be lost) by eliminating it.
2. Proponents of the Elimination
Among those who have advocated the elimination of the
Court's obligatory appellate jurisdiction are Chief Justice
Burger, Justice Marshall, Justice Blackmun and Justice Powell.
See Commission on Revision of the Federal Appellate Court System,
Structure and Internal Procedures: Recommendations for Change,
172-188 (1975). _
In addition the Department of Justice has previously taken
a position favoring the elimination of obligatory appellate
Jurisdiction. See Department of Justice Committee on Revision
of the Federal Judicial System, The Needs of the Federal Courts,
41-13 (1977). Finally, the Freune Report strongly advocated the
same change. See, Federal Judicial Center, Report of the Study
Group on the Case Load of the Supreme Court, 25-38 (1972).
We are unaware of any opposition.
3. The Proposal
The proposal is fairly simple in form. Set forth below is
a section-by-section analysis of the draft.
Section 1. This section gives the name of the Act.
Section 2. This section repeals 28 U.S.C. 1252. That section
currently provides for appellate (mandatory) jurisdiction in the
Supreme Court for cases from the various @istrict courts where
one judge has invalidated an Act of Congress in a case in which
the United States or its agencies or emplovess is a party. The
purpose of the section obviously is to expedite cases in which an
Act of Congress has been invalidated by a single judge. However,
it is our view that in such cases application for a stay would
almost always be granted and wheie it is not application can be
made for certiorari prior to judgment in the court of appeals
under 28 U.S.C. 1254({1).
The effect of the repeal is to place jurisdiction for such
cases in the courts of appeals under 28 U.S.C. 1291 and 1292.
If the judgment were upheld and the case of sufficient importance
then a writ of certiorari could be sought under 28 U.S.C. 1254(1).
Reveal the original PDF page, then click a word to highlight the OCR text.
Community corrections
No user corrections yet.
Comments
No comments on this document yet.
Bottom Reader Ad Slot
Bottom Reader Ad Slot placeholder
If you would like to support SpookStack without paying out of pocket, please consider allowing advertising cookies. It helps cover hosting costs and keeps the archive free to browse. You can change this choice at any time.
Continue Exploring
Agency Collection
Explore This Archive Cluster
Broad Topic Hub
Topic Hub
letter
bureau
Related subtopics
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic