White-Collar Courts

Article III courts are white-collar courts. They are, scholars have said, "special." They sit atop the judicial hierarchy, and they are the courts of the one percent. We inculcate that sense of specialness in a variety of ways: federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction; they are th...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inVanderbilt law review Vol. 76; no. 4; pp. 1155 - 1213
Main Author McAlister, Merritt E
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Nashville Vanderbilt University, School of Law 01.05.2023
Vanderbilt Law Review
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Article III courts are white-collar courts. They are, scholars have said, "special." They sit atop the judicial hierarchy, and they are the courts of the one percent. We inculcate that sense of specialness in a variety of ways: federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction; they are the subject of a (perhaps overrated) class in law school; we privilege clerkships with federal judges more than with state-court judges; and we focus more scholarly attention on federal courtsthan state courts. They are, in short, the courts of the elite--jurisdictionally, doctrinally, and socially. Perhaps the singular importance of federal courts was inevitable, but this Article explores that attitude's darker side. White-collar courts privilege certain kinds of disputes and certain classes of litigants; federal courts prefer white-collar work to blue-collar work. Such privilege, this Article argues, creates expressive and attitudinal harms: it imposes a value judgment about the work of federal courts that denigrates some, while exalting others.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
ISSN:0042-2533
1942-9886