Federal Judicial Power (ARTICLE III)

Question 1

What is the Rule from Marbury v. Madison?

Answer 1

Congress cannot expand the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court beyond constitutional limits

Question 2

What is Original Jurisdiction?

Answer 2

The authority of a court to hear and decide a case for the first time, before any appellate review.

Question 3

What is the Rule from Martin v. Hunters Lessee?

Answer 3

The Supreme Court has the power to review state-court decisions that determine the constitutionality of State Statutes under the Constitution presenting questions of federal law

Question 4

What is the Rule from Cohens v. Virginia?

Answer 4

Supreme Court of the US decisions that can be heard have to be over federal law concerning a constitutional case

Question 5

What is the Exceptions and Regulations Clause?

Answer 5

Provides Congress with broad powers to remove matters from the Supreme Court and grants the court with Appellate jurisdiction

Question 6

What is the Rule from Ex Parte McCardle? (Congress and the Courts)

Answer 6

Primary SC case interpreting the Exceptions and Regulations Clause: Congress can repeal jurisdiction it grants to the Supreme Court but cannt do it by telling them what rule to apply

Question 7

What is the Rule under US v. Klein? (Congress Statute Where President Pardons are inadmissible)

Answer 7

The legislative branch may not impair or direct the exclusive powers of the judicial or executive branch due to the separation of powers in the Constitution

Question 8

Who is the only power that has the authority to pardon?

Answer 8

The President

Question 9

What are Justiciability Limits? (Article III Section 2)

Answer 9

Refers to a series of judicially created doctrines that limit the types of matters that federal courts can decide. “Cases and Controversies”

Question 10

Can Prudential Doctrines be overridden by Congress?

Answer 10

YES: Doctrines that are based on prudent judicial administration and can be overriden by Congress since they are NOT Constitutional requirements

Question 11

What are Prudential Doctrines?

Answer 11

Principals developed by Courts to guide their exercise of judicial power. They concern Standing, Ripeness, and Mootness

Question 12

What are the FIVE Major Justiciability Doctrines?

Answer 12

1. Adversary Opinions (What)
2. Standing (Who)
3. Ripeness (When)
4. Mootness (When)
5. Political Question Doctrine (What)

Question 13

What are Adversary Opinions?

Answer 13

States that federal courts cannot issue advisory opinions because they are only allowed to adjudicate actual cases and controversies

Question 14

What is the Rule of Hayburns ? (Pensions)

Answer 14

Congress does not have the authority to order federal courts to perform non-judicial acts

(Making recommendations regarding pensions)

Question 15

What is the Rule from Plaut v. Spendthrift Farm Inc?

Answer 15

Congress may not pass retroactive legislation that has the effect of forcing the courts to reopen final judgements, as this violates the separation of powers

Question 16

What did Justice Scalia say regarding Article III of the Constitution?

Answer 16

The Constitution reserves for the courts the power to say what the law is (Plaut v. Spendthrift)

Question 17

What is Standing?

Answer 17

Whether a person has the right to bring a lawsuit in court because there is a sufficient connection to the legal issue and that they will be directly affected by the outcome of the case

Question 18

What are the Constitutional Requirements that must be met to satisfy Standing?

Answer 18

1. Injury: Has the Plaintiff suffered an injury?
2. Causation: Is the injury fairly traceable to the Defendant’s conduct?
3. Redressability: Will a favorable federal court decisions likely redress the injury?

Question 19

What are the two things that Plaintiff can prove to show Injury?

Answer 19

1. Direct and Personal Injury: cannot be generalized
2. Real and Immediate Injury: not hypothetical because it has already happened or certainly impending

Question 20

What is Causation in Standing?

Answer 20

There must be a casual connection between the injury suffered and the conduct of the Defendant. Plaintiff must show that the defendants actions are the direct cause of their injury

Question 21

What is Redressability in Standing?

Answer 21

The Court must be able to provide a remedy that can alleviate the injury suffered by the Plaintiff

Question 22

What is the Rule from Allen v. Wright? (Standing)

Answer 22

Plaintiff must allege/ explain that they actually suffered or imminently will suffer a real, concrete and particularized injury

Question 23

What are the two major prudential standing principals?

Answer 23

1. A party may generally only assert his or her own rights and cannot raise the claims of third parties not before the court
2. A plaintiff may not sue as a taxpayer or citizen who shares another grievance in common with all other taxpayers and citizens

Question 24

The Application of the Exception of Third Party Standing is based on what two factors?

Answer 24

1. The closeness of the relationship between the Plaintiff and the injured third party
2. The likelihood that the third party can sue on its own behalf (ex: a “hinderance” exists to protect their own interest

Question 25

What is the case that provided ONE exception to the rule against taxpayer injury?

Answer 25

Flast v. Cohen: An enactment is challenged as a violation of the Taxing and Spending Clause: the way the government was taxing institutions

Question 26

What is Ripeness?

Answer 26

Ripeness addresses a timing question: is the matter premature for judicial review? It ensures courts do not intervene prematurely in a dispute before the issues are fully formed or when the rights have not yet been affected

Question 27

What is the Rule for Abbott v. Gardner? (ripeness)

Answer 27

Ripeness seeks to separate matters that are premature for review because the injury is speculative and never may occur

Question 28

What is the 3 criteria for evaluating ripeness?

Answer 28

1. How likely is it that the predicted harm will take place?
2. What hardship will the Plaintiff suffer without pre-enforcement review?
3. Are the issues adequately focused and presented for review?

Question 29

What is Mootness?

Answer 29

A case is Moot when the issue is no longer “live” or the parties lack a cognizable interest in the outcome.

If anything occurs to end the Plaintiff’s injury the claim is dismissed as Moot

Question 30

What does a case become Moot? (2)

Answer 30

1. It can be said with assurance that “there is no reasonable expectation that the alledged violation will reoccur AND
2. Interim relief or events have completely and irrevocably eradicated the effects of the alleged violation

Question 31

What is the difference between Mootness and Ripeness?

Answer 31

1. Ripeness asks whether an injury that has not yet happened is sufficiently likely to happen (Abbott Labs)
2. Mootness asks whether an injury that has happened is too far beyond a useful remedy

Question 32

What are 3 exceptions to the Mootness Doctrine?

Answer 32

1. When a wrong is “capable of repetition but evading review”
2. Voluntary cessation of alleged improper behavior
3. Class Action Suits

Question 33

Under the Moot exception of when a wrong is capable of repetition but evading review? (2)

Answer 33

Determines whether a case that has become moot can still be heard by the Court

Test:
1. An injury is of a short duration such that it is inevitable that it will be over before the federal court proceedings are completed

2. The injury is likely to occur to the Plaintiff in the future

Question 34

What is the Rule for Friends of the Earth v. Laidlaw under Mootness?

Answer 34

Under the 2nd Exception of voluntary cessation: To earn a dismissal that the Defendant has “the heavy burden of persuading the court” by making it absolutely clear that the wrongful behavior could not reasonably be expected to reoccur”

Question 35

A certified Class Action is not Moot even if..

Answer 35

the claim of the named representative is moot. (Sosna v. Iowa)

Question 36

What is the Political Question Doctrine?

Answer 36

It excludes from judicial review those controversies which resolve around policy because the Constitution restricts it by giving that power to another branch

Question 37

What is the Rule from Baker v. Carr? (Malapportionment)

Answer 37

Federal Courts have the authority to hear cases involving the apportionment of state legislative districts

Question 38

What is Malapportionment?

Answer 38

Situation in which electoral districts have unequal populations, leading to an imbalance in representation