Fed Judicial Pwr Flashcards
The “cases and controversies” requirement from Art. III, what are the 4 requirements for justicibility?
1) Standing = whether the π is the proper party to bring the matter to a fed ct
2) Ripeness = whether a fed ct may grant pre-enforcement review of a law
3) Mootness = whether the case is a “live” controversy by having a continuing injury
4) Political Question Doctrine = whether the fed ct should defer to another branch of the fed gov’t
What are the 4 req’s for a π to have standing?
1) Injury: the π must allege and prove that she HAS been injured or IMMINENTLY will be injured. Injury is NOT mere ideological objection to a law. π’s seeking injunctive or declaratory relief must show likelihood of future harm
2) Causation & redressibility: π must allege and prove that the ∆ CAUSED the injury so that a favorable ct decn is likely to REMEDY the harm If ct’s ruling would have no effect, then it’d be an advisory op (NOT ALLOWED)
3) NO 3d party standing: π CANNOT assert claims of 3d partys not before the ct EXCEPTIONS: 3d party standing is allowed IF… there is a CLOSE relationship b/t the π and the injured 3d party (e.g. dr-patient relationship; custodial parents; BUT NOT non-custodial parent) the injured party is unlikely to ASSERT THEIR OWN rights (e.g. if jurors are subject to systematic discrimination, they are unlikely to bring a claim as they don’t have an incentive to serve) it’s an ORGANIZATION suing on behalf of its members, IF (1) members would have standing to sue; (2) interests are germane to the org’s purpose; AND (3) neither the claim nor relief req’s participation of individual members
4) NO generalized grievances: the π must not be suing solely “as a CITIZEN” or a TAX PAYER interested in having the gov’t follow/not follow the law OR spend tax money in a certain way NOTE: if the gov’t law actually targets a specific person, then he could sue EXCEPTION #1: taxpayers DO have standing to challenge gov’t expenditures p/t federal statutes as violating the Establishment Cl (i.e. sep of church and state), but NOT law granting tax credits for religious school scholarships because not an expenditure of govt funds EXCEPTION #2: a person has standing as a citizen to allege that a federal action violates the 10th Am by interfering w/ pwrs reserved to the state (as long as the person can show injury and redressability)
What does ripeness require?
Rule: π is NOT entitled to review of a statute or regulation before its enforcement AGAINST the π
EXCEPTION: Pre-enforcement review IS OK IF: π will suffer immediate hardship, AND issues on record are fit for judicial review (i.e. the record is suffiicently developed)
What ismootness?
Mootness = events after filing of suit end π’s injury; NO good b/c cases require a live controversy. Note: a non-frivolous money damages claim will keep suit alive.
3 EXCEPTIONS where the case is will NOT be dismissed. 1) the wrong is capable of repetition BUT avoiding reviewb/c of it’s ltd time duration (e.g. an abortion claim as π will likely NOT be preg at time of trial) 2) voluntary cessation, but ∆ can freely resume (e.g. emp who gives a discrim test can easily stop/start whenever) 3) for class action suits: mootness of named π does NOT moot action, if injury still exits for AT LEAST one other class member
What isthe Political Question Doctrine?
Refers to const violations that the fed cts WILL NOT adjudicate (as it would be better left to another branch of gov’t)
Types of cases dismissed as non-justiciable political questions… 1) Any type of case implicating the Guarantee Cl (i.e. the US will g’tee to each state a republican form of gov’t) 2) Challenges to the President’s conduct of foreign policy 3) Challenges to the impeachment/removal process 4) Challenges to PARTISAN gerrymandering
What is the rule re: mandatory SCOTUS review?
General rule: All appeals from state courts and federal courts of appeals come to SCOTUS on discretionary writ of certiorari
EXCEPTIONS (i.e. mandatory review): 1) Appeals from 3-judge federal district courts 2) Suits b/t states (original/exclusive jx) NOTE: By statute, Congress can change the SCOTUS’s appellate jurisdiction, but NOT original jurisdiction
What 2 reqs must be satisfied before SCOTUS can hear cases on appeal?
1) Final judgment: SCOTUS may hear ONLY after there has been a final judgment of the (i) HIGHEST state ct, (ii) a US Ct of Appeals; OR (iii) a 3-judge panel from fed dist ct
2) NO independent st law ground: SCOTUS may hear a case ONLY if there is NO independent/adequate state law ground for the decn. If a state ct decn rests on 2 grounds (1 federal; 1 state), and SCOTUSs reversal won’t change the result in the case, then SCOTUS can’t hear
Can federal cts OR state cts hear suits against state gov’ts?
NO!
Fed cts (and state cts) may NOT hear suits against state gov’ts. Based on SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY under the 11th Am., which bars suits against states in fed cts, fed agencies OR state cts (even on federal claims)
NOTE: this bar does NOT apply to (i) local/city gov’ts; OR (ii) state officers (BUT state officers may NOT be sued for money damages to be paid by the st)
EXCEPTIONS (where a state may be sued)… 1) Waiver 2) States may be sued p/t fed laws adopted under §5 of the 14th Am. (authorizes Congress to adopt laws to enforce the 14th Am); Congress cannot authorize suits under ANY OTHER const. prvn 3) BK proceedings: the 11th Am does NOT apply to federal laws excerized p/t Congress’ bankruptcy pwrs (i.e. does not bar actions of the US BK cts)
When must a fed ct abstain from an action?
Fed cts may NOT enjoin PENDING st ct proceedings when claim is premised on unsettled issue of st law
