James Sigel and Adam Sorensen authored an article for the Daily Journal covering the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision holding that a plaintiff seeking to challenge the constitutionality of Federal Trade Commission (FTC) proceedings must first go through the FTC proceedings.
“Changing the law through the lower federal courts can be a very slow process,” the authors wrote. “The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’ recent decision in Axon v. FTC demonstrates on reason why. All three members of the 9th Circuit panel were plainly sympathetic to the plaintiff’s argument that various aspects of the FTC’s administrative enforcement procedures violate the Constitution. All three also appeared to agree that the plaintiff should be able to press those constitutional claims. But in a divided opinion, the panel majority rejected the contention that plaintiff had properly invoked the jurisdiction of the federal courts, reluctantly adhering to binding precedent that, it believed, closed the courthouse doors – at least for now. As Axon shows, jurisdictional limits on the power of the courts tend to make efforts to change the status quo all the more daunting.”
Read the full article.