Document Type
Article
Publication Date
3-2026
Abstract
While the federal policy favoring arbitration is codified in the 1925 Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), the strength of that policy depends on the treatment that arbitration receives in federal courts and in the United States Supreme Court in particular.
Courts in all jurisdictions play an important role in fashioning the treatment of arbitration agreements, arbitral proceedings and arbitral awards. However, the judicial role in this regard is especially pronounced in the United States, in view of the problematic state of legislation on the subject. The federal legislation on arbitration is 100 years old and has never been meaningfully amended. The FAA basically reads as it did upon its enactment, except to implement the New York and Panama Conventions on the recognition and enforcement of international arbitral awards. In addition, the federal government does not have exclusive legislative authority, even over international arbitration. Arbitration is also subject to State law provided it is not inconsistent with federal law and policy.
Given the relative legislative vacuum in the U.S., it is the federal courts — and especially the U.S. Supreme Court — that have shaped the U.S. law of international arbitration and established its first principles. In this contribution, I examine, through the lens of its most prominent judgments, the place that the U.S. Supreme Court has given international arbitration in U.S. law.
Disciplines
Dispute Resolution and Arbitration | International Law | Law
Recommended Citation
George A. Bermann,
The Supreme Court's Policy Favoring Arbitration and Its Limits,
36
Am. Rev. Int'l Arb.
109
(2026).
Available at:
https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship/4768