Con Law Flashcards
Requirements for Judicial Review
- case or controversy
- subject-matter jurisdiction
Case or Controversy
- plaintiff has standing
- claim is ripe when the lawsuit is filed
- claim is not mooted
- lawsuit does not seek an advisory opinion
Standing
- injury in fact (concrete and not hypothetical)
- causation (fairly traceable to conduct of defendant)
- redressability (injury likely to be rectified by a favorable court decision)
Citizenship Standing
cannot challenge conduct just because citizen
Taxpayer Standing
no standing to challenge how tax contributions used.
exceptions:
- challenging collection of specific tax assessment
- challenging congressional standing on grounds that it violates First Amendment’s prohibition on establishment of religion
Third-Party Standing
3P cannot bring action on behalf of another unless there is:
- hindrance to injured party bringing the action herself and
- close relationship between parties such that 3P will adequately advocate inured party
Organizational Standing
may bring federal cause of action on behalf of members if it can show:
- one or more of its members would have standing to bring the case
- claims are related to organization’s purpose
- litigation of the case will not involve participation of those members who have been injured
Class-Action Standing
class representative must have standing to bring case as an initial matter. But if class member’s injury is redressed during pendency of case, that will not destroy standing for remaining class members
Ripeness
not ripe when harm has not yet occurred and is not imminent. Factors:
- fitness of issues for current adjudication
- hardship to the parties if the claim is not heard
Mootness
moot if a court ruling would no longer remedy the problem or make the plaintiff whole.
Exceptions:
- defendant voluntarily ceases the challenged event/action and it is likely to recur
- action is (a) so short in duration that it will be moot before resolution of case and (b) there is a reasonable probability the same plaintiff will suffer the same injury in the future
Advisory Opinions
do not adjudicate legal dispute but merely give advice to another branch of gov’t on constitutionality of law or action.
federal courts do not give advisory opinions. some state courts are authorized to do so.
Political Questions
- textual, constitutional commitment of the issue to another branch of gov’t
- lack of judicially discoverable and manageable standards for resolving question
- matter requires making a policy determination
- impossible to decide matter without disrespecting coordinate political department
- unusual need for unquestioning adherence to previously decided political issue
- potential embarrassment from inconsistent decisions
Abstention
federal court may decline to hear a case over which it has jurisdiction when there is a potential for conflict with state courts over interpretations of state law and policy
- unsettled issues of state law
- ongoing state criminal prosecutions
- state court civil enforcement proceedings
Relationship Between Federal and State Courts
state court decisions final on matters of state law.
Supreme Court can review state court decisions on federal law to ensure:
- uniform application of federal constitutional law throughout country and
- finality of litigated federal law issues
Limits on U.S. Supreme Court Jurisdiction
- appeal must be from final judgment by highest state court. Decision of intermediate state court reviewable if either no right of appeal to state’s highest court or state’s highest court declined to exercise power to review.
- decision cannot rest on adequate and independent state law ground.
Congressional Power to Define and Limit Federal Courts
Constitution vests in Congress the powers to create inferior courts and to make exceptions to appellate jurisdiction of federal courts.
this congressional power is plenary (no internal limits) but cannot violate another part of the Constitution.
Congressional Powers
- necessary and proper clause
- taxing power
- spending power
- commerce clause
- war and foreign powers
- nondelegation doctrine
- power to enforce amendments
Necessary and Proper Clause
Congress has power to make laws that are:
- necessary (convenient or useful) and
- proper to executing its other powers (legitimately related to another existing power)
Taxing Power
congress can enact taxing measures that
- raise revenue for the general welfare and
- are not a penalty (unduly coercive or enacted to discourage certain private behavior)
Spending Power
Congress can spend federal money for general welfare but can only impose conditions on federal grants to states if the condition is:
- clear and unambiguous (states understand consequences of accepting)
- related to a legitimate federal interest
- not unduly coercive
- constitutional
Commerce Clause
Congress can regulate commerce with foreign nations, among several states, and with the Indian tribes. Cannot use this to compel participation in commercial activity. Can regulate:
- channels (areas in which interstate commerce moves)
- instrumentalities and persons/things (items and ways in which items are carried across state lines)
- activities having a substantial effect on interstate commerce (private activities can be regulated if cumulative impact of individuals and entities engaging in activities has substantial effect on interstate commerce)
Dormant Commerce Clause
states cannot:
- discriminate against interstate commerce unless state has a compelling interest for enacting law and no less restrictive way of achieving that interest (STRICT SCRUTINY) or
- places undue burden on interstate commerce (weighs burdens of a state law against local benefits).
Dormant Commerce Clause: Discriminatory v. Neutral
Discriminatory on its face if it:
- treats out-of-staters different from in-staters or
- clearly gives economic protection to in-state residents
Neutral: if a law is neutral, use undue burden
Dormant Commerce Clause: Exceptions
- can discriminate against out-of-state interests if market participant (buyer or seller) rather than regulator
- even where regulator, can discriminate against out-of-state interests in favor of publicly owned enterprise if regulation is an exercise of traditional gov’t function
- Congress may enact statute that expressly authorizes states to discriminate against nonresidents regarding interstate commerce