Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Con Law > Judiciary Power > Flashcards

Judiciary Power Flashcards

1
Q

What is the power of judicial review?

A

The power to review the constitutionality of federal and state laws and executive acts.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What did Marbury v. Madison decide?

A

The authority of the ct. to decide that acts of Congress are unconstitutional.

Congress may not amend SCOTUS’s original jurisdiction.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Historical background of Marbury v. Madison

A

Federalist retrenchment. Lame duck president (Adams) appoints John Marshall as Chief Justice. Federalist Senate passes Circuit Cts Act (16 new judgeships). Jefferson takes office and refuses to deliver appointments.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Could SCOTUS grant Marshall the remedy he sought?

A

No. §13 of The Judiciary Act (granting SCPTUS the right to hear the case) unconstitutional b/c granted judiciary moe power than Const. allowed. Art III §2 of COnst. defines maximum fed. SMJ.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What was the genius of Marbury?

A

Case dismissed for lack of jurisdiction but demonstrated that SCOTUS has the right to review acts of Congress.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Congress’s levers of political influence over the Judiciary

A

budget and appropriation
the size of Supreme Ct
amending Const.
impeachment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

President’s levers of political influence over the Judiciary

A

control over the enforcement of federal law

appointments to the judiciary

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What did Fletcher v. Peck decide?

A

Case decided that SCOTUS can invalidate state law

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What did Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee decide?

A

Case decided the legitimacy of SCOTUS’s review of state court judgments.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

§25 of Judiciary Act

A

Act gave SCOTUS jx when the state resolves a federal question. SCOTUS gets fed appellate jx.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What did VA v. Cohens decide?

A

Case extended SCOTUS’s authority to review constitutionality of laws and state court judgments to when the state itself was a party.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Why are state laws subject to SCOTUS review?

A

because in ratifying the constitution, states effectively agreed to subject themselves to the power of Art. III

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What Article of the Const gives subjects state laws to SCOTUS review?

A

Article III

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Practical and political constraint on federal judicial power

A

The judiciary has no way to enforce their decisions.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

The Exceptions Clause Art. III, §2, cl 2

A

Congress can make exceptions to SCOTUS’s appellate jx. The Const. only lists a ceiling to SCOTUS’s jx. “In all cases before mentioned…shall have appellate jx…with such exceptions and under such regulations as Congress shall make.”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What gives Congress authority to create inferior courts?

A

Article III §1

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

What gives Congress authority to define the appellate jx of inferior courts?

A

Article III §2, cl. 2

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Over what cases does SCOTUS have original jx?

A

Cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be a party.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

What did ex Parte McCardle decide?

A

When restricting the court’s jx, Congress’s intent does not matter. The judiciary may not “inquire into the motives of the legislature.” Congress can make exceptions to cts’ appellate jx, regardless of its motives.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

What are some tools the legislature and exec branch can use to restrict the judiciary outside of Art III?

A 
constitutional amendments
impeachment of justices
C to determine size and timing of SCOTUS
selection of process of justices
exec enforcement (or lack thereof)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

What are some limits on Congress’s exception power?

A

C may not interfere with the essential/ core functions of SCOTUS

C cannot violate Constitution

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

What is an advisory opinion?

A

Occurs when there is a lack of standing, mootness, or ripeness. Unenforceable ct. decision.

23
Q

What Const. provision defines advisory opinions?

A

Art. III Cases and Controversies

24
Q

What does Art. III Cases and Controversies state?

A

states that ct. decisions must be concrete and non-hypothetical

25
Q

Why are advisory opinions prohibited?

A

separation of powers

Judicial role limited to deciding actual disputes

26
Q

What is the minimum requirement for a litigant to bring a case or controversy under Art III?

A

the litigant must have standing

27
Q

What are the 3 essential requirements for standing? Lujan

A

injury in fact
causation
redressabiilty

28
Q

How must a generalized grievance be resolved?

A

through the political process

29
Q

injury in fact

A

concrete and particularized, and actual or imminent (not abstract or hypothetical)

30
Q

causation

A

caused by allegedly wrongful conduct of D. Traceable to conduct of D.

31
Q

redressability

A

relief sought will redress the alleged injury. Can be partial relief.

32
Q

What must be decided before a case is decided on its merits?

A

jx nature–standing

33
Q

What did CA v. Lyons demonstrate?

A

case shows an injunction against future action won’t redress personal injuries

34
Q

What did Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife show?

A

Where P raises only a generally available grievance, vidication of the public interest is up to the Exec Branch and C.

35
Q

What article describes when a person has standing? Can this be adjusted?

A

Art III. C cannot change minima via statute

36
Q

Does one have standing if there is a procedural injury?

A

No, unless the injury is tied to the underlying injury in fact

37
Q

What is a procedural injury?

A

the government’s allegedly unlawful failure to follow a certain, legally required process

38
Q

unripeness

A

Case brought too soon. Insufficiently developed

39
Q

Why does the requirement of ripeness exist?

A

To prevent Ps from bringing premature, undredressable adjudication

40
Q

Mootness

A

injury no longer exists or is no longer redressable

41
Q

How does a case become moot?

A

If circumstances change, such as death, settlement, or change in law.

42
Q

What are the exceptions to mootnes?

A

voluntary cessation by D

capable of repetition, yet evading review

43
Q

Why does voluntary cessation by D not make a case moot?

A

Because D is free to resume behavior

44
Q

Why is an injury that is capable of repetition, but that has evaded review, not moot?

A

Because the challenged conduct is too short lived to be fully litigated prior to cessation/ expiration

45
Q

Examples of something capable of repetition yet evading review for purposes of mootness

A

pregnancy, abortion injuries

46
Q

What are political questions?

A

Questions invested in the Leg or Exec branches to resolve (elected branches)

47
Q

What are the characteristics of a political question?

A
  1. textual commitment from Const. to an elected branch

2. lack of judicially discoverable and manageable standards fro resolving an issue

48
Q

What cts. can answer political questions?

A

No federal courts. Under Art III cases and controversies.

49
Q

What case demonstrates the “political question analysis?”

A

Zivotofsky v. Clinton

50
Q

Strict scrutiny

A

presumption of unconstitutionality

51
Q

intermediate scrutiny

A

important and closely related

52
Q

rational basis

A

presumption of constitutionality

53
Q

Acronym for lack of Fed Jud jx

A 
RAMPS
R- ripeness
A- abstention
M-mootness
P-political question
S-standing

Con Law (8 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions