[4] The degree of authority of a bankruptcy judge varies depending on the nature of the matter.
If the dispute relates to a non-core matter, then the bankruptcy judge can hear the dispute and issue findings of fact and conclusions of law, but these are subject to de novo review by a district judge.
A bankruptcy judge also does not have access to the full range of case management tools held by a district court judge, and is for example unable to appoint a special master in complex cases.
The 1978 Act set a six-year transition period to the new system, but in 1982 the Supreme Court ruled in Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co. that the judgeships created under the 1978 Act were unconstitutional under Article III of the US Constitution.
[10] The subsequent cases Stern v. Marshall (2011) and Executive Benefits Insurance Agency v. Arkison (2014) further limited the power of bankruptcy judges by holding, respectively, that they could not issue final judgments on common law matters even if they are within core bankruptcy jurisdiction, and that this constitutional issue could be cured by issuing proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law to be reviewed de novo by the district court.