Also known as: Article III court · Article 3 court · Article 3 courts · art. III court · art. III courts · Art. III courts
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
Federal courts established by Congress pursuant to Article III of the Constitution. Judges of these courts hold office during good behavior and receive compensation that cannot be diminished during their continuance in office.
SkyWind LLC filed an adversary proceeding in bankruptcy court against Horizon Utility Corp. alleging breach of a prepetition state-law power purchase agreement. Horizon objected that the bankruptcy judge lacked authority to enter final judgment. The objection was sustained because the claim was a traditional state-law contract action between private parties.
After filing for bankruptcy, a debtor asserted a state-law tort counterclaim against a creditor in bankruptcy court. The creditor moved to withdraw the reference. The motion was granted because the counterclaim did not stem from the bankruptcy itself and required resolution by an Article III judge.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Foreign nationals and states sued in federal district court to enjoin a presidential proclamation restricting entry from certain countries. The district court entered a nationwide injunction. The injunction was reviewed by Article III courts exercising the full judicial power over constitutional claims.
A photographer obtained a jury verdict in federal district court for lost transparencies. The court of appeals applied state law to reduce the award. The reduction was reviewed under standards preserving the role of Article III courts and the Seventh Amendment jury trial right.
A college challenged a government conveyance of surplus property to a religious organization. The organization moved to dismiss for lack of standing. The motion was granted because the plaintiffs failed to allege a concrete injury redressable by an Article III court.
The City of New York and health care providers sued to challenge the President's cancellation of spending provisions under a new statute. The district court declared the cancellations unconstitutional. The Supreme Court affirmed because the cancellations altered the legal rights and duties of affected parties in a manner requiring resolution by Article III courts.
Judges receive lifetime tenure during good behavior and compensation that cannot be diminished while they remain in office. These protections ensure judicial independence from the political branches. Bodies whose members serve fixed terms and lack salary protection cannot exercise the judicial power reserved to Article III courts.
No. Congress may not take cases of the type traditionally heard by Article III courts and assign them wholesale to Article I courts. A state-law contract claim between private parties remains the kind of dispute historically resolved only by Article III judges. The bankruptcy court therefore lacks authority to enter final judgment on such a claim.
Congress may create Article I tribunals to administer federal regulatory schemes and resolve disputes arising under those schemes. Such tribunals may combine rulemaking and adjudication when their work is tied to implementation of congressionally created rights. They may not, however, adjudicate traditional private-rights disputes that fall within the judicial power vested exclusively in Article III courts.
…The Special Division is a "Court of Law" for purposes of the Appointments Clause. It is a division of the Court of Appeals, an Article III court. Appellees argue that the Special Division's appointment power is invalid because the Division is not a "court" in the traditional sense when it acts under the Act. We rejected a similar…