Original Habeas Redux

Article — Volume 97, Issue 1

97 Va. L. Rev. 61
Download PDF

In Original Habeas Redux, I map the modern dimensions of the Supreme Court’s most exotic jurisdiction, the original habeas writ. The Court has not issued such relief since 1925 and, until recently, had not ordered a case transferred pursuant to that authority in over fifty years. In August 2009, by transferring a capital prisoner’s original habeas petition to a federal district court rather than dismissing it outright, In re Davisabruptly thrust this obscure power back into mainstream legal debate over both the death penalty and the Supreme Court’s appellate jurisdiction. 

Scrambling to understand how the authority has evolved since its nineteenth-century heyday, commentators have been severely limited by the absence of any data reporting the attributes of the original petitions themselves. I have filled that empirical void by collecting and organizing the only modern original habeas data, and this Article presents those results for the first time. The data shows that the vast majority of original petitioners are criminally confined, but that they are not collaterally challenging that confinement in their initial habeas proceedings. Original writ procedure is now primarily a vehicle for litigating “successive” habeas corpus petitions that are otherwise subject to severe jurisdictional limits in the federal courts.

I argue that, in light of the writ’s history and the data I have compiled, Davis is not a blip in an otherwise constant state of original habeas inactivity. I observe that the availability of original habeas relief has historically exhibited two over-arching characteristics: (1) that the Supreme Court’s Article III appellate power to grant it is basically coextensive with Article III judicial power common to all federal courts; and (2) that the Court does not actually exercise that authority when it may avail itself of jurisdictional alternatives. I also present data confirming that the availability of conventional appellate jurisdiction exerts the dominant influence on the modern original habeas docket’s composition. I ultimately advance what I call the “capital safety valve paradigm”—the idea that original habeas should and likely will emerge as a means to ensure that the death penalty is not erroneously imposed.

Click on a link below to access the full text of this article. These are third-party content providers and may require a separate subscription for access.

  Volume 97 / Issue 1  

The Complexity of Jurisdictional Clarity

By Scott Dodson
97 Va. L. Rev. 1

Original Habeas Redux

By Lee Kovarsky
97 Va. L. Rev. 61

Will Employers Undermine Health Care Reform by Dumping Sick Employees?

By Amy Monahan and Daniel Schwarcz
97 Va. L. Rev. 125

Confronting Reality: Surrogate Forensic Science Witnesses Under the Confrontation Clause

By Nicholas Klaiber
97 Va. L. Rev. 199