Justiciability Limits

Question 1

Define the Justiciability limits

Answer 1

The doctrine of the justiciability limit, limits the types of matters that federal courts can decide

Question 2

What are the two prohibition on advisory opinions?

Answer 2

1. There must be an actual dispute between adverse litigants
2. There must be a substantial likelihood that a federal court decision in favor of a claimant will bring about some change or have some effect

Question 3

Define Constitutional Standing

Answer 3

Constitutional standing is the determination of whether a specific person is the proper party to bring a matter to the court for adjudication

Question 4

What are the three elements for Constitutional standing?

Answer 4

1. Plaintiff must allege they have suffered or imminently will suffer an injury
2. Plaintiff must allege that the injury is fairly traceable to the defendant’s conduct
3. Plaintiff must allege that a favorable court decision is likely to redress the injury.

Question 5

What is the standing standard for States?

Answer 5

It is the same as the plaintiff but lower

Question 6

What are the prudential standing requirements?

Answer 6

1. Third-party standing

2. General grievances

Question 7

What two factors will determine whether a plaintiff can sue on behalf of a third-party?

Answer 7

1. The closeness of the relationship between the plaintiff and the injured party
2. Likelihood that the third party can sue on its own behalf

Question 8

Define the prohibition of third-party standing?

Answer 8

A party generally may assert only their own rights and cannot raise the claims of third-parties not before the court

Question 9

Define general grievances

Answer 9

Prevents individuals from suing if their only injury is as a citizen or a taxpayer concerned with having the government follow the law

Question 10

Based on Flast v. Cohen, when does a taxpayer have standing?

Answer 10

1. When Congress is acting under the taxing and spending clause
2. Violates the Establishment Clause

Question 11

When may an association sue for themselves or on behalf of their members?

Answer 11

1. One of its members is suffering an injury in fact
2. The association seeks to vindicate interest that are related to the organization’s institution objectives
3. The claim being asserted does not necessitate the participation of the member in the suit

Question 12

Define ripeness

Answer 12

an issue must present an immediate harm, rather than the injury being speculative and may never occur

Question 13

What two questions must you ask to determine if an issue is ripe?

Answer 13

1. Is the issue fit for judicial review?

2. What is the hardship to the parties of withholding court consideration?

Question 14

When a case concerns an administrative regulation, how is the case determined to be ripe

Answer 14

1. If the plaintiff complies and faces direct and immediate hardship
2. If the plaintiff does not comply they will face criminal or civil penalties if the court’s consideration is withheld

Question 15

Define mootness

Answer 15

A plaintiff must present a live controversy at all stages of the litigation.

Question 16

If a case is moot, what does it become?

Answer 16

An advisory opinion

Question 17

What are the exceptions to mootness?

Answer 17

1. Wrongs capable of repetition, but evading review
2. Voluntary cessation
3. Class action

Question 18

Define the political question doctrine

Answer 18

Refers to allegations of constitutional violations that federal courts will not adjudicate, and the Supreme Court deems to be inappropriate for judicial review

Question 19

What are the four types of political questions?

Answer 19

1. Issues under the Guaranty Clause
2. Foreign Policy
3. Impeachments and Removals
4. Congressional self-governance

Question 20

Based on Baker v. Carr, what are the three questions the court must ask to determine a political question?

Answer 20

1. Does the issue involve resolutions of questions committed by text to the Constitution to a coordinate branch of government?
2. Would resolution of the question demand that a court move beyond areas of judicial expertise?
3. Do prudential considerations counsel against judicial intervention?

Question 21

Define the principles of avoidance

Answer 21

The Supreme Court has said it would follow certain “principles of avoidance” to ensure that it will reach constitutional questions only when necessary

Question 22

The A in principles of avoidance

Answer 22

The court cannot anticipate a question constitutional law. The court will not decide the constitutional law question unless it is absolutely necessary to the decision of the case

Question 23

The B in the principles of avoidance

Answer 23

The court will not decide the rule of a constitutional law question broader than is required by the facts of that specific case

Question 24

The C in the principles of avoidance

Answer 24

The court will not pass on a constitutional question if there is also another ground for the case to be decided. This can either be decided on the involvement of a constitutional question or the statutory construction

Question 25

The D in the principles of avoidance

Answer 25

Don’t have an injury by the operation of the statute. The court will not pass on the validity of the statute

Question 26

The E in the principles of avoidance

Answer 26

Not Entertain the constitutionality of a statute for a citizen who has availed themselves of the benefit

Question 27

The F in the principles of avoidance

Answer 27

For the validity of an Act of Congress is called into question, the court will first ascertain the construction of the statute to avoid the constitutional question

Question 28

The first principle of avoidance (Loser)

Answer 28

The Court will not pass upon the constitutionality of legislation in a friendly, nonadversary, proceeding. "A party beaten in the legislature could not transfer to the courts an inquiry as to the constitutionality of the legislative act.”