• 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

Card Range To Study

through

image

Play button

image

Play button

image

Progress

1/11

Click to flip

Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;

Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;

H to show hint;

A reads text to speech;

11 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
  • 3rd side (hint)
Art. III --> Federal judicial power

Federal courts may only decide actual cases & controversies.
Other doctrines limiting federal court review (justiciability):

political question; sovereign immunity; abstention
Federal courts may not render advisory opinions.
Advisory opinions lack:

1) Actual dispute between adverse parties;
2) Legally binding effect on parties
Federal courts may only decide controversies ripe for judicial review
Requests for pre-enforcement of laws are not ripe unless 1) Substantial hardship in absence of review and 2) Fitness of issues in record for review

Hint: More imminent and likely substantial hardship, the more legal and factual issue, the more ripe
Federal Courts may only decide live controversies rather than ones that have passed due to post-filing events
Lawsuit's moot if plaintiff's injury has ended unless:

1) injury capable or repetition yet evades review
2) D. voluntarily ceases activity but may start up again, or
3) in class actions, one plaintiff suffers ongoing injury
Plaintiff must have standing to sue:

1) Almost any harm
2) No ideological arguments/general grievances as citizen/taxpayer
3) Injury must have occurred/will imminently occur (If injunctive/declaratory relief, must show likelihood of future harm)
4) No third party standing
5) Legislators may challenge acts that personally injure
Exceptions:

1) May challenge own tax liability
2) May challenge congressional spending (not executive spending from general appropriations) in violation of establishment clause
Third Party Standing Exceptions
1) Third party unlikely/unable to sue, P suffered actual injury and P can adequately represent 3d P interests

2) Organization may sue on behalf of members and itself if members would have standing, members' injury related to purpose, neither claim nor relief requires participation of members

3) Free speech overbreadth: P whose speech is unprotected may raise claim of 3d party whose speech is protected if substantial overbreadth in terms of illegitimate to legitimate sweep, and not reg. of commercial speech
Standing: Causation and Redressability
P. must show:

1) Injury is fairly traceable to D
2) P must show that favorable court decision can remedy harm (money damages, injunction)
3) No speculative remedy!
Fed courts won't decide political questions committed by Constitution to political branches of gov., or incapable/inappropriate for judicial resolution
Guaranty clause; foreign affairs conduct; impeachment procedures; gerrymandering; elections and qualifications of Congress members, seating of superdelegates
Sovereign immunity from 11A and general federalism principles bar actions against states (not localities) in federal courts/agencies and state courts

Suits not barred against state officers (injunctive relief or $ damages from them); suits against local gov (cities, counties)
Exceptions:
1) Waiver by state via express consent
2) Suits by other states or federal gov.
3) Bankruptcy proceedings
4) Clear abrogation of sov. imm. by Congress under its 14A powers to prevent discrimination
Abstention
Federal courts may decline to decide a federal constitutional claim that turns on an unsettled question of state law

Federal courts may generally not enjoin pending state, administrative, judicial proceedings
Supreme Court Review
Supreme Court generally may only hear a case after final judgment by highest state court, federal court of appeals, or 3-judge district court

Won't review case raising federal question if state decision rests on independent and adequate state law grounds such that outcome would be same regardless of how federal question is decided