Can bankruptcy courts use the All Writs Act to expand their jurisdiction and authority beyond the confines of the Bankruptcy Code? And if so, can they use the Act to permanently enjoin a non-core, state-court proceeding, without the parties' consent?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Though bankruptcy courts are considered courts of equity, their jurisdiction is limited. This Court has held that while bankruptcy courts can adjudicate “core” proceedings, they cannot adjudicate “non-core” proceedings absent consent from all parties. Here, the bankruptcy court issued a permanent injunction extinguishing Petitioners’ non-core, state-law claims against a non-debtor. To justify its action, the bankruptcy court used the All Writs Act, which has been described by this Court as a drastic and extraordinary remedy. There is significant debate amongst courts and scholars whether bankruptcy courts can even use the All Writs Act. This Court, however, has yet to address this important issue. So the questions presented are: Can bankruptcy courts use the All Writs Act to expand their jurisdiction and authority beyond the confines of the Bankruptcy Code? And if so, can they use the Act to permanently enjoin a non-core, state-court proceeding, without the parties’ consent?