Study your flashcards anywhere!

Download the official Cram app for free >

  • Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
Reading...
Front

How to study your flashcards.

Right/Left arrow keys: Navigate between flashcards.right arrow keyleft arrow key

Up/Down arrow keys: Flip the card between the front and back.down keyup key

H key: Show hint (3rd side).h key

A key: Read text to speech.a key

image

Play button

image

Play button

image

Progress

1/11

Click to flip

11 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
Supreme Court Original Jurisdiction
Art. 3 Section 2, "in all cases affecting Ambasadors, other public ministers and consuls and those in which a state shall be a party"

- Congress may neither restrict nor enlarge the SC original jurisdiction
- Congress may give concurrent jurisdiction to lower federal courts
- SC original juridiction mainly occupied by "controversies between 2 or more states"
Maruburry v. Madison
F: Appointed judges last day of office
I: Can SP review acts of Congress and void those that are against Constitution
H: Yes
- Court could not intervene with presidential decisions in which the President possessed "a constitutional or legal discretion"
SC Appellate Jurisdiction (Power of Judicial Review)
constitution doesnt expressly say but SC can hear appeals regarding constitutionality of:
1) acts of other branches of the federal government
2) state statutes
3) Constitutionality of decisions by a state's highest court
2 methods for SC appellate jurisdiction
1) appeal (jurisdiction is mandatoy)
2) certiorari (where it is withiin the Court's discretion)
Baker v. Carr
F: Challenging apportionment of voting districts, because population had grown
I: Do federal courts possess jurisdiction over a constitutional challenge to a legislative apportionment
H: Yes

-The mere fact that a P seeks protection of a political right does not mean a political question
- The relationship between the judiciary and the coordinate branches of the federal governemnt gives rise to political questions not the federal judiciary relationship to the states
Factors to determine if Political Question (Baker v. Carr)
1) textually demonstrable constitutional commitment of the issue to a cordinate political dept.
2) lack of judicially discoverable or manageable standard for resolving it
3) impossibility of deciding without an initial policy determination of a kind clerly for nonjudicial discretion
4) impossibility of a courts undertaking independent resolution without expressing lack of the respect due coordinate branches of the govt.
5) unusual need for unquestioning adherence to a political decision already made
6) potential of embarrassment from pronouncements by various depts on one question
Areas traditionaly held to be political questions
1) Qualifications of congress memeber
2) matters of impeachemnt (nixon v. US)
3) determining when hostilities are over
4) treatises
5) guarantee clause (republican form of govt.)
6) extending amendment ratification times
Jurisdiction of Federal Court Cases
1) Arising under the Constitution, an act of Congress, or a federal treaty
2) in which the US is a party
3) Between a state and citizens of another state
4) between citizens of different states ("diversity cases")
Ripeness
- Focuses on the presence of a possibility of contingency in place of an actual litgable event:
- Need to evaluate:
1) whether delayed review would cause hardship to P
2) whether judicial intervention would inappropriately interefere with further administrative action AND
3) whether the courts would beenfit from further factual development of the issues presented
Mootness
centers on the succession of the events themselves, to ensure that person or group mounting a constitution challenge confronts continuing harm or a significant prospect of future harm.
Mootness Exceptions
1) Issues which are capable of repetition yet evading review: mootness will not apply if the challenged action is too short in its duration to be fully litigated before its cessation or expiration, and there is a reasonable expectation the same complaining party will be subjected to the same action again.
2) voluntary cessation: a defendant’s voluntary cessation of challenged practice does not deprive federal court of its power to determine the legality of the practice.
3) collateral consequences: a case is not moot where, even though stopped, the challenged action leaves lasting consequences.
4) class action: mootness of the class action rep claim after the class has been certified: the case is NOT moot.