CCA Fellow Theo Cheng examines how the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. CASA, Inc. may affect the perceived value of injunctive relief in arbitration. Although arbitral tribunals can issue effective interim and emergency relief, their authority generally extends only to the parties before them—a limitation traditionally viewed as a disadvantage compared with federal courts.
By restricting federal courts’ ability to issue nationwide injunctions benefiting nonparties, CASA narrows that distinction and may place courts and arbitral tribunals on more equal footing. Cheng considers whether this shift could influence parties’ decisions to choose arbitration, while noting important distinctions between the government action at issue in CASA and the commercial disputes typically resolved through arbitration.
Originally published in NY Dispute Resolution Lawyer, Vol. 19, No. 2 (2026). Republished with permission from the New York State Bar Association.
