•  
  •  
 

Abstract

This Article endeavors to reclaim the nationwide injunction as a valid exercise of federal equity power within the jurisdictional limits set by Article III. It posits that federal equity is expansive—it extends as far as necessary to provide a remedy where there is no adequate one at law. Historical and doctrinal context and critique are deployed to demonstrate that nationwide injunctions are not constitutionally ultra vires. This Article also posits that despite having expansive equity jurisdiction and powers, federal courts can and should in many cases exercise their constitutional discretion when sitting in equity to abstain in certain nationwide injunction suits. It goes on to propose a prudential, discretionary kind of abstention with factors calibrated to deter abusive litigation tactics, prevent untoward interference with nonparty rights and forum-shopping, promote comity between district courts, and encourage percolation of issues.

Download

Share

COinS