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

Access to Justice
April 29, 2025

RELEASE: Supreme Court Seems Poised to Issue a Narrow Decision in Wrong-House Raid Case

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Martin v....
By: Miriam Becker-Cohen, Nargis Aslami
Access to Justice
April 28, 2025

Martin v. USA: A wrong-house raid ends up at the door of the Supreme Court

Local News Live
WASHINGTON (Gray DC) - It’s a classic David v. Goliath here at the Supreme Court....
Access to Justice
April 28, 2025

Widow of airman killed in on-base crash asks high court for review in Feres doctrine fight

Stars and Stripes
Staff Sgt. Cameron Beck hopped on his motorcycle on a spring day four years ago...
Rule of Law
April 25, 2025

When does President Donald Trump’s defiance of courts in deportation case cross the line into a constitutional crisis?

Cronkite News
WASHINGTON – Presidents of both parties have pushed the limits of their authority throughout history....
Rule of Law
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia

American Foreign Service Association v. Trump

In American Foreign Service Association v. Trump, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia is considering whether the Trump Administration’s efforts to unilaterally dismantle USAID are constitutional and comply with federal law.
Immigration and Citizenship
U.S. Supreme Court

Trump v. CASA, Trump v. Washington, and Trump v. New Jersey

In three cases, the Supreme Court is considering whether to partially stay preliminary injunctions blocking the Trump Administration’s executive order purporting to limit birthright citizenship to children who have at least one parent who is...