Case or Controversy – Paul Mollica's Federal Courts Blog

Lack of “Adversity” Between Litigants Over a Constitutional Question Deprives Court of Article III Case or Controversy, Holds Fifth Circuit

In Pool v. City of Houston, No. 22-2049 (5th Cir. Dec. 11, 2023), the Fifth Circuit dismisses a four-year-old First Amendment case for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, where the court determines that “all parties have agreed from the beginning . . . that Houston’s [challenged] voter registration provisions governing circulators” are unconstitutional, and thus theContinue reading “Lack of “Adversity” Between Litigants Over a Constitutional Question Deprives Court of Article III Case or Controversy, Holds Fifth Circuit”

Settlement Agreement That Paid Plaintiff $100,000 to Take an Appeal Did Not Deprive Court of “Case or Controversy,” Holds Divided, En Banc Elventh Circuit

In Carson v. Mansanto Co., No. 21-10994 (11th Cir. July 10, 2023), the en banc Eleventh Circuit holds that it has appellate jurisdiction to adjudicate a dispute about whether a “federal agency action that otherwise lacks the force of law preempts the requirements of state law,” despite the complication that the defendant paid the plaintiffContinue reading “Settlement Agreement That Paid Plaintiff $100,000 to Take an Appeal Did Not Deprive Court of “Case or Controversy,” Holds Divided, En Banc Elventh Circuit”

Split Tenth Circuit Holds That FISC’s Pre-Clearance Rulings Under Section 702 Program Are Not “Advisory Opinions” in Violation of Article III

As part of a 170-page decision (with a 48-page dissent) affirming a criminal conviction for conspiring and providing material support to a State Department-designated foreign terrorist organization, United States v. Muhtorov, No. 18-1366 (10th Cir. Dec. 8, 2021), the panel divides over whether annual preapproval of surveillance procedures by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC)Continue reading “Split Tenth Circuit Holds That FISC’s Pre-Clearance Rulings Under Section 702 Program Are Not “Advisory Opinions” in Violation of Article III”

Fourth Circuit Holds That District Court Had Subject-Matter Jurisdiction Over Complaint with Pseudonymous Plaintiff

In B.R. v. F.C.S.B., No. 21-1005 (4th Cir. Nov. 2, 2021), the Fourth Circuit accepts an interlocutory appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) and holds that a federal court has subject-matter jurisdiction over a claim despite not knowing the plaintiff’s true name. A plaintiff – named “Kate” in the opinion – “commenced this action byContinue reading “Fourth Circuit Holds That District Court Had Subject-Matter Jurisdiction Over Complaint with Pseudonymous Plaintiff”