Badgerow v. Walters
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in Badgerow v. Walters and why it matters. Quotes are taken from the syllabus (the Court’s short summary at the start of the opinion).
Summary
A short, plain-English overview of Badgerow v. Walters.
The Supreme Court ruled that the 'look-through' approach for determining federal jurisdiction does not apply to requests to confirm or vacate arbitral awards under Sections 9 and 10 of the FAA. The decision reversed the Fifth Circuit's affirmation of the District Court's jurisdiction, which had used the look-through method. The Court emphasized the absence of statutory language in Sections 9 and 10 that would support such an approach.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Badgerow v. Walters.
The Court held that Vaden's 'look-through' approach to determining federal jurisdiction does not apply to requests to confirm or vacate arbitral awards under Sections 9 and 10 of the FAA.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in Badgerow v. Walters. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Judicial Review is relevant to Badgerow v. Walters
The Court's decision involves the interpretation of statutory language and jurisdictional principles, which is a core aspect of judicial review.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Held: Vaden's 'look-through' approach to determining federal jurisdiction does not apply to requests to confirm or vacate arbitral awards under Sections 9 and 10 of the FAA.
-
Why State–Federal Power is relevant to Badgerow v. Walters
The case discusses the allocation of authority between federal and state courts in handling arbitration-related applications.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)And third, there are good reasons why state, rather than federal, courts should handle applications like the ones in this case.
-
Why Standing is relevant to Badgerow v. Walters
The decision addresses the requirements for federal jurisdiction, which relates to standing and the ability to bring a case in federal court.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Courts do not possess jurisdiction to decide ordinary motions by virtue of the look-through method.
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Badgerow v. Walters that support the summary and concepts above.
Vaden's 'look-through' approach to determining federal jurisdiction does not apply to requests to confirm or vacate arbitral awards under Sections 9 and 10 of the FAA.
Sections 9 and 10 of the FAA contain none of the statutory language on which Vaden relied.
Even the most formidable policy arguments cannot overcome a clear statutory directive.
