Legal Opinion

Whether a Bankruptcy Judge's Appointment of a Special Master Would Violate Article III of the Constitution

Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel

Decided March 17, 2026Published

1Opinion of the Court

(Slip Opinion) Whether a Bankruptcy Judge’s Appointment of a Special Master Would Violate Article III of the Constitution A bankruptcy court’s unilateral subdelegation of functions requiring an Article III judge’s “total control” violates Article III of the Constitution. Proposed amendments to the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure authorizing bank- ruptcy judges to appoint special masters to perform functions involving constitutional- ly non-core claims would deprive Article III courts of the requisite “total control.” March 17, 2026 MEMORANDUM OPINION FOR THE ACTING DIRECTOR EXECUTIVE…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Thomas v. ArnSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Mathews v. WeberSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  3. United States v. RaddatzSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  4. Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
  5. Stern v. MarshallSupreme Court of the United States · 2011

21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API