Draft:Equity power of United States courts

This is a draft article. It is a work in progress open to editing by anyone. Please ensure core content policies are met before publishing it as a live Wikipedia article. Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL Easy tools: Citation bot (help) | Advanced: Fix bare URLs · Article logs · Draft logs. Last edited by SilverLocust (talk | contribs) 31 days ago. (Update) Finished drafting? Submit for review or Publish now

Under Article III of the United States Constitution, the judicial power of the United States extends to cases "in law and equity".

Equity (also sometimes known as chancery to distinguish other definitions of "equity") is the body of jurisprudence originating from the Court of Chancery of England. It primarily supplements defects of the common law. For example, common-law courts would generally only impose money damages, whereas equitable remedies, most notably injunctive relief, normally compel a person to do something or refrain from doing something – with disobedience being punishable as contempt.

Before the founding of the United States, equity was still solidifying into a coherent body of jurisprudence.

The thirteen colonies made limited use of courts of equity, and equitable power was controversial.

Under Article III of the United States Constitution, the judicial power of the United States extends to cases "in law and equity".^[1]

Cite Funk.

In re Debs (1895)

Norris-LaGuardia Act

Cite Bamzai.

Rename section to cover Ex parte Young (1908)?

Cover limits on "political" injunctions. Cite Kull.

Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins (1938)

Guaranty Trust Co. v. York (1945)

Grupo Mexicano de Desarrollo, S. A. v. Alliance Bond Fund, Inc. (1999)

Maybe ERISA cases on equitable relief

Maybe Liu v. SEC (2020)

Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council (2008)

eBay Inc. v. MercExchange, L.L.C. (2006)^[2]

• Aditya Bamzai & Samuel L. Bray, Debs and the Federal Equity Jurisdiction, 98 Notre Dame L. Rev. 699 (2022).
• Samuel Bray, The Supreme Court and the New Equity, 68 Vand. L. Rev. 997 (2015).
• Richard H. Fallon Jr., Constitutional Remedies: In One Era and out the Other, 136 Harv. L. Rev. 1300 (2023).
• Kellen R. Funk, The Union of Law and Equity: The United States, 1800-1938, in Equity and Law: Fusion and Fission, (John C.P. Goldberg, Henry E. Smith & P.G. Turner eds., 2019).
• Kellen R. Funk, Equity's Federalism, 97 Notre Dame L. Rev. 2057 (2022).
• Owen W. Gallogly, Equity's Constitutional Source, 132 Yale L.J. 1213 (2023).
• Randolph J. Haines, The Conservative Assault on Federal Equity, 88 Am. Bankr. L.J. 451 (2014).
• John Harrison, Federal Judicial Power and Federal Equity Without Federal Equity Powers, 97 Notre Dame L. Rev. 1911 (2022).
• Riley T. Keenan, Functional Federal Equity, 74 Ala. L. Rev. 879 (2023).
• Andrew Kull, Equity's Atrophy, 97 Notre Dame L. Rev. 1801 (2022).
• Richard H.W. Maloy, Expansive Equity Jurisprudence: A Court Divided, 40 Suffolk U. L. Rev. 641 (2007).
• Michael T. Morley, The Federal Equity Power, 59 B.C. L. Rev. 217 (2022).
• James E. Pfander & Wade Formo, The Past and Future of Equitable Remedies: An Essay for Frank Johnson, 71 Ala. L. Rev. 723 (2020).
• Mila Sohoni, Equity and the Sovereign, 97 Notre Dame L. Rev. 2019 (2022).

"We have enjoyed something of an equity renaissance in recent years. The Supreme Court has been busy, fashioning a body of federal equity law for application to a diverse array of problems."^[3]

• In 2022 the Notre Dame Law Review held a symposium on the federal equity power, which produced several articles on the subject. Justice Amy Coney Barrett of the U.S. Supreme Court delivered the keynote address on the subject.