Arbitrate This

Today, the Fair Arbitration Now Coalition – a group of civil rights and other groups working to defend the ability of consumers, workers, minorities, and the elderly, among others, to obtain access to justice – are marking “Arbitration Fairness Day,” aimed at raising awareness of the abuses of mandatory arbitration. Under this system – used by many banks, employers, nursing homes, and thousands of other corporations — consumers who believe that a company has violated their legal rights are nonetheless prohibited from seeking redress in court, but rather, are required to take their complaint into a private system in which their dispute is ruled on by an arbitrator, typically chosen by the company, resulting in rulings in favor of the corporation 94% of the time.

Last summer, following growing concern about the practice of mandatory arbitration, the Senate Judiciary Committee held hearings on recent Supreme Court decisions concerning corporate misconduct and regulation. CAC submitted written testimony (pdf) stating that decisions such as Preston v. Ferrer are inconsistent with the text, history, and principles of the Constitution, in that they favor “corporate rights and interests over the fundamental rights and liberties of individuals.” (In Preston, the Supreme Court held that even where a State agency has expressly assumed exclusive jurisdiction over a matter suited to its expertise and oversight, any questions related to a contract with an arbitration clause must be decided by an arbitrator, not a court of law or a State agency.) Among others testifying before the Committee was Elizabeth Bartholet, a Harvard Law professor and former arbitrator who was removed as an arbitrator by a credit card company after she had ruled against it.

As we stated in our testimony, “the Constitution and its amendments were intended to provide individual rights and structural safeguards to ensure the health of a government of ‘We the People,’ not ‘We the Corporations of the United States of America.’” Mandatory arbitration can blatantly violate this principle, and CAC applauds the Fair Arbitration Now Coalition for calling attention to the need to ensure access to courts and to end abusive uses of mandatory arbitration.

More from

Rule of Law
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Jackler v. Merit Systems Protection Board

In Jackler v. Merit Systems Protection Board, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit is considering whether the Trump administration can ignore critical civil service laws when removing Immigration Judges.
Rule of Law
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York

Comey v. Department of Justice

In Comey v. Department of Justice, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York is considering whether the Attorney General can fire an Assistant U.S. Attorney in contravention of legal protections...
Civil and Human Rights
July 18, 2026

Arnie Arnesen Attitude July 16 2026

Attitude with Arnie Arnesen
CAC’s David H. Gans joined The Attitude with Arnie Arnesen to discuss the Reconstruction Amendments. Listen...
Access to Justice
----- Supreme Court -----

Crowther v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia

In Crowther v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, the Supreme Court is considering whether employees of federally funded educational institutions can bring Title IX suits for sex discrimination.
Civil and Human Rights
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York

Wridt v. City of New York

In Wridt v. City of New York, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York is considering whether the NYPD’s mass surveillance system is unconstitutional.
Federal Courts and Nominations
July 16, 2026

CAC Release: Todd Blanche’s Record Disqualifies Him From Serving as America’s Lawyer

WASHINGTON, DC – In response to this week’s confirmation hearings on Todd Blanche’s nomination to...
By: Praveen Fernandes