Federal courts are often asked to issue various forms of expedited relief, including stays pending appeal. This Article explores a little examined device that federal courts employ to freeze legal proceedings until they are able to rule on a party’s request for a stay pending appeal: the “administrative” or “temporary” stay. A decision whether to impose an administrative stay can have significant effects in the real world, as illustrated by recent high-profile litigation on topics including immigration and abortion. Yet federal courts have not endorsed a uniform standard for determining whether an administrative stay is warranted or clarified the basis for their power to issue such a stay. This Article draws attention to the administrative stay device and proposes standards to guide federal courts in determining when such a stay is appropriate. In so doing, the Article probes the bounds of federal courts’ equitable authority and the interests underlying their decisions about whether to grant interim relief in response to claims of impending harm.
The per se rule against specific enforcement of personal service contracts is well established under Anglo-American contract law. At the same time...
The United States is undergoing a legal realignment, in that salient legal views recently associated with the right are now being espoused by the left...
This essay considers the future of public-private collaboration in the wake of the Murthy v. Missouri litigation, which cast doubt on the...
Almost half of the states in the country have made it harder to get an abortion since the Supreme Court in 2022 overturned the federal right to get an...
History and precedent tell us that the just compensation requirement has been implemented by a complex network of remedies providing multiple avenues...
It has been a big moment for court reform. President Biden has proposed a slate of important if vaguely defined reforms, including a new ethics regime...
After a term in which the conservative Roberts court swept aside the Chevron doctrine, a decision that will clip federal agencies’ authority to enact...
In Cantero v. Bank of America, the US Supreme Court declined to decide whether Bank of America Corp. must pay interest on New York mortgage borrowers’...
The Supreme Court has overruled Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, finally interring a doctrine of statutory interpretation that it had...
On June 27, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed a case brought by the federal government regarding whether Idaho’s abortion ban conflicts with a...
On Thursday afternoon, in an important lawsuit seeking to clarify which religious objectors will be taken seriously when they seek legal exemptions, a...
We apply a dynamic influence model to the opinions of the U.S. federal courts to examine the role of the U.S. Supreme Court in influencing the...
In February 2024, the Alabama Supreme Court issued an unprecedented decision, finding that frozen embryos should be treated as children under Alabama...
The Environmental Law and Community Engagement Clinic at the University of Virginia School of Law filed this amicus brief on behalf of San Bernardino...
Who has the legal right to challenge decisions by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration? And should the moral umbrage of a group of anti-abortion...
President Joe Biden promised during his State of the Union address on March 7, 2024, that he would make the right to get an abortion a federal law.
“If...
An upcoming Supreme Court case on Article III standing and disability presents critical questions about the future of litigation that promotes...
Professor Elizabeth Scott, the chief reporter of the American Law Institute’s (ALI) Restatement of Children and the Law, has often observed that the...