Posted by Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S. on October 01, 1998 at 21:02:29:
In Reply to: excellent bibliography of law journal articles posted by Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S. on October 01, 1998 at 19:26:28:
"Q. Does the Constitution give people any right
to proceed or be proceeded against, in the first
instance, in an inferior federal constitutional
court rather than a federal legislative court?
"A. As to criminal defendants charged with
offenses committed in one of the states, surely.
As to others, it's hard to say. The answer
may well vary for civil plaintiffs and
civil defendants. And it must vary, must it not,
according to the nature of the right in question
and the availability and scope of review in a
constitutional court."
citing: Ex parte Bakelite Corp., 279 U.S. 438 (1929);
Katz, "Federal Legislative Courts," 43 Harvard
Law Review 894 (1930); Notes, 46 Harvard Law
Review 677 (1933); 34 Columbia Law Review 344, 746 (1934).
Later, in his conclusions:
"... [J]urisdiction always is jurisdiction
only to decide constitutionally." Id. p. 1402.
Source: "The Power of Congress to Limit the
Jurisdiction of Federal Courts: An Exercise
in Dialectic," by Henry M. Hart, Jr., in
66 Harvard Law Review 1365-1366 (1953)
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Counselor at Law, Federal Witness,
and Private Attorney General