Academic highlight: Resnik on mandatory arbitration

In her contribution to the Yale Law Journal’s symposium on arbitration, Judith Resnik analyzes the last thirty years of the Supreme Court’s cases interpreting the Federal Arbitration Act and reaches a surprising conclusion:  Although these decisions have encouraged the “mass production of arbitration clauses” requiring hundreds of millions of consumers and employees to use arbitration to resolve disputes, these groups almost never do so.  In other words, Resnik finds that the practical effect of the Court’s arbitration jurisprudence has been to replace a system of public judicial dispute resolution with no dispute resolution at all.

Resnik’s article begins with a discussion of the Court’s recent decisions construing the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA).  The Court has steadily expanded the scope of arbitration, holding that the FAA permits arbitration clauses that bar access to courts for breach of federal securities laws, for employees’

Original SCOTUS article

Academic highlight: Howard on the evolving Supreme Court

In 1962, University of Virginia Law School professor A.E. Dick Howard clerked for Justice Hugo Black, and he has been a close observer of the Court ever since.  In a recent article, The Changing Face of the Supreme Court, Professor Howard describes how the Supreme Court has evolved over the last fifty-three years, providing the long view on an institution that is both timeless and ever changing.

In 1962, the Supreme Court was made up of nine white men, as it always had been.  Today, of course, the Court has three female members and is ethnically and racially diverse.  But Howard reminds us that it is a “mistake to assume that members of racial and ethnic minorities have a monolithic approach to issues.”  Despite its lack of diversity, the Court was unanimous in Brown v. Board of Education, and

Original SCOTUS article

lawyer-banner