Ca Bar

Front 1

Article III grants what types of authority?

Back 1

• The authority for judicial review
• The authority for review of federal laws and executive actions
• The authority for review of state courts and state government actions

Front 2

4 justiciability doctrines

Back 2

Standing, ripeness, mootness, political question

Front 3

Injury types and requirements

Back 3

• Types of injuries (Violations of common law rights, torts, breaches of contracts, invasion of property rights, violation of constitutional rights)
• Plaintiffs only may assert injuries that they personally have suffered
• Plaintiffs seeking injunctive or declaratory relief must show a likelihood of future harm

Front 4

Causation and redressability

Back 4

*Plaintiff must show that defendant caused injury so that a favorable court decision is likely to remedy the injury
*Federal courts have no advisory opinion power

Front 5

Exceptions to 3rd party standing

Back 5

1. Exception: third party standing is allowed if there is a close relationship between the plaintiff and the injured third party (Doctor-patient for abortion rights, Barkeeper-customer law)
2. Exception: third party standing is allowed if the injured third party is unlikely to be able to assert his or her own rights(Criminal defendants have third party standing to raise rights of prospective jurors to be free from discrimination in juror selection)
3. Exceptions: an organization may sue for its members, if –
The members would have standing to sue
The interests are germane to organizations purposes
Neither the claim nor relief requires participation of individual members

Front 6

No generalized grievances – rule and exception

Back 6

1. The plaintiff must not be suing solely as a citizen or as a taxpayer interested in having the government follow the law
2. Exception: taxpayers have standing to challenge government expenditures as violating the Establishment Clause (Very narrow exception – taxpayers lack standing to challenge governmental property grants to religious institutions)

Front 7

Ripeness OR May federal court allow pre-enforcement review of statute or regulation? Declaratory relief?

Back 7

• The hardship that will be suffered without pre-enforcement review – greater the hardship w/o pre-enforcement review, the more likely the fed ct will hear the case
• The fitness of the issues in the record for judicial review – does the ct have everything before it to properly decide the issue?

Front 8

Mootness – Rule and Exception

Back 8

∏ must present a live controversy at all states of the proceeding - Case will be dismissed as moot if ∏ is no longer suffering injury:
1. Exception: wrong capable of repetition but evading review
2. Exception: voluntary cessation, where ∆ voluntarily halts injurious practice, but is free to resume at any time
3. Exception: class action suits

Front 9

What is a political question and give examples

Back 9

Allegations of constitutional violations that court will not get involved in (will not adjudicate):
• The "republican form of government clause"
• The process for ratifying constitutional amendments
• Challenges to the President’s conduct of foreign policy
• Challenge to Carter’s recession of a treaty
• Challenges to the impeachment and removal process
• Challenges to partisan gerrymandering

Front 10

Independent and Adequate State Grounds

Back 10

*If a state court decision rests on 2 grounds, one state and one federal, if the Supreme Court’s reversal of the federal law ground will not change the result in the case, the Supreme Court cannot hear it
*If unclear whether adequate state court ground, Supreme Court will assume that there is none and hear the case