Law, disrupted

Universal Injunctions: A Conversation with Professor Samuel Bray


Listen Later

John is joined by Samuel L. Bray, the John N. Matthews Professor of Law at Notre Dame Law School.  They discuss the increasing—and controversial— use of universal (often called “nationwide”) injunctions.  Universal injunctions are court orders that block government policies not just for the parties to a case, but for everyone, including nonparties to the litigation.  The term “nationwide injunctions” suggests that the controversy over them stems from the geographic scope of the injunctions.  However, federal district courts have long issued nationwide and international injunctions in many fields, including patent enforcement.  The issue raised by universal injunctions is that they regulate the government’s behavior toward non-parties.

Universal injunctions have proliferated in the past ten years, with nearly every major presidential initiative—regardless of administration—being halted by a single district court judge somewhere in the country.  Historically, such sweeping injunctions were virtually nonexistent until the 1960s.  Injunctions would apply only to the parties in a case, allowing the legal issues to percolate through multiple appellate courts before potentially reaching the Supreme Court for definitive resolution.

Proponents argue that universal injunctions ensure equality and efficiency by preventing unconstitutional policies from being applied to anyone, not just the plaintiffs in the case at hand.  Critics argue universal injunctions undermine democratic governance, short-circuit legal development, and encourage forum shopping and rushed decision-making.  These injunctions may also produce class action outcomes without meeting the legal requirements for a class.

The Supreme Court is now poised to address the issues posed by universal injunctions, in a case involving birthright citizenship.  Professor Bray believes the Court will limit universal injunctions using the equitable tradition codified in the Judiciary Act, which did not historically allow such remedies.  He expects the Court to reaffirm that injunctions should provide relief only to the parties in the case unless a class is certified.

Podcast Link: Law-disrupted.fm
Host: John B. Quinn 
Producer: Alexis Hyde
Music and Editing by: Alexander Rossi

...more
View all episodesView all episodes
Download on the App Store

Law, disruptedBy Law, disrupted

  • 4.7
  • 4.7
  • 4.7
  • 4.7
  • 4.7

4.7

67 ratings


More shows like Law, disrupted

View all
Masters in Business by Bloomberg

Masters in Business

2,175 Listeners

Odd Lots by Bloomberg

Odd Lots

1,993 Listeners

Bloomberg Law by Bloomberg

Bloomberg Law

379 Listeners

The Daily by The New York Times

The Daily

113,121 Listeners

Stay Tuned with Preet by Preet Bharara

Stay Tuned with Preet

32,354 Listeners

Interesting Times with Ross Douthat by New York Times Opinion

Interesting Times with Ross Douthat

7,244 Listeners

FT News Briefing by Financial Times

FT News Briefing

684 Listeners

Strict Scrutiny by Strict Scrutiny

Strict Scrutiny

5,832 Listeners

All-In with Chamath, Jason, Sacks & Friedberg by All-In Podcast, LLC

All-In with Chamath, Jason, Sacks & Friedberg

10,254 Listeners

The Ezra Klein Show by New York Times Opinion

The Ezra Klein Show

16,525 Listeners

Divided Argument by Will Baude & Dan Epps

Divided Argument

746 Listeners

In Good Company with Nicolai Tangen by Norges Bank Investment Management

In Good Company with Nicolai Tangen

187 Listeners

The Morgan Housel Podcast by Morgan Housel

The Morgan Housel Podcast

989 Listeners

Money Stuff: The Podcast by Bloomberg

Money Stuff: The Podcast

403 Listeners

Unhedged by Financial Times & Pushkin Industries

Unhedged

194 Listeners