Professor Larson Publishes Op-ed on Supreme Court Case in Daily Journal

Professor Carlton Larson published an op-ed in the Daily Journal regarding Bank Markazi v. Peterson, a case in which the U.S. Supreme Court will consider whether Congress can pass a law directing the outcome of litigation in a pending federal case. The ruling could determine whether Iran's central bank must pay nearly $2 billion to relatives of Americans killed in the 1983 bombing of a Marine Corps barracks in Lebanon that was linked to Iran via Hezbollah.

Larson notes that the idea of Congress directing the courts to rule in a particular fashion would seem to violate the separation of powers, and in United States v. Klein, the Court ruled to limit the power of Congress to effect pending litigation.  Yet "Congress routinely makes changes in underlying law that affect the outcome of pending cases," Larson notes, citing cases in which the Court held that such changes do not violate the separation of powers.

Ultimately, Professor Larson expects the Court to side with the plaintiffs: "The Iranian government is hardly a sympathetic litigant, and the issue doesn't seem obviously ideological," he writes.  "But if Bank Markazi prevails, the case will hold more significance. Much would turn on the scope of the court's ruling; a narrow ruling would likely give Congress ample room to accomplish similar results by more artful drafting. A broader ruling might call into question a greater array of statutes, which is why such a ruling seems unlikely."

Carlton Larson's research interests focus on constitutional law and legal history, with a strong emphasis on the 18th century.

Primary Category

Tags