Abstract
Despite historical and modern developments, the heart of bankruptcy law centers around providing fresh starts to those who find themselves in severe financial distress. Congress created bankruptcy courts to help efficiently and effectively facilitate this goal. However, the complexity of debtor-creditor relationships necessitates that most bankruptcy proceedings hear a variety of claims, some of which may not arise out of the bankruptcy itself but are still required for bankruptcy resolution. Consequently, the authority of bankruptcy courts to hear all relevant claims is an essential component of bankruptcy relief. Bankruptcy Courts are not granted authority under Article III of the Constitution, but under Article I. This Comment explores the dynamic relationship between non-Article III bankruptcy courts and Article III judicial authority, and how this unstable relationship affects the facilitation of bankruptcy goals
Recommended Citation
Kevin H. Kim,
A Constitutional Tango of Judicial Interpretation: The Instability of Bankruptcy Court Authority under Article III,
34
Emory Bankr. Dev. J.
561
(2018).
Available at:
https://scholarlycommons.law.emory.edu/ebdj/vol34/iss2/9