From these two pathbreaking decisions, we can see that Jordan's Principle has important jurisdictional and equality rights implications.
Whereas we often witness governments seeking greater jurisdictional responsibility in constitutional disputes about the division of governmental powers, with respect to jurisdictional responsibilities and in particular financial responsibilities towards Indigenous peoples, governments often retreat.
Despite efforts by non-Indigenous governments to limit their jurisdictional responsibilities and concomitant financial obligations, the importance of Indigenous self-determination risks being overlooked in these federal-provincial jurisdictional disputes.
the "jurisdictional idealists." The idealists believe that
laws will "look jurisdictional" and others will not, (5) The
Congress may not declare rules jurisdictional if they do not pertain to
Typically, the 11th Circuit's jurisdictional questions revolve around whether the complaint or notice of removal filed in federal district court properly alleges citizenship of the parties to an action.
(14) For its part, the 11th Circuit has urged district courts to "inquire into whether [they have] subject-matter jurisdiction at the earliest possible stage in the proceedings." (15) This judicious recommendation notwithstanding, inadvertent mistakes or omissions in allegations of party citizenship continue to go unnoticed, unchallenged, and uncorrected in the district court, giving rise to the multitude of jurisdictional questions that the 11th Circuit issues while cases are pending before it on appeal.
Common examples of jurisdictional defects on citizenship cited by the 11th Circuit include pleadings or removal notices that: 1) allege only the residence of a natural person; 2) omit a corporation's principal place of business; or 3) fail to identify the citizenship of the members of an unincorporated business entity, such as a partnership or limited liability company.
crafting a new equilibrium in jurisdictional doctrine.
litigation costs by leaving open new avenues for jurisdictional
jurisdictional jurisprudence in light of these underlying commitments.