Judicial Review

Question 1

1 - Art III, Section 2 grants jx to which cts?

Answer 1

grants federal judicial power to the SCOTUS, as well as any inferior couts that may be established by Congress.

Although Art II does not require Congress to establish any lower courts, it has nevertheless created fed district cts and circuit courts of appeal.

Question 2

2 - what are the categories of fed ct jx established under the const?

Answer 2

(1) fed Q
(2) affecting ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls;
(3) admiralty and maritime;
(4) where the US is party
(5) between two or more states
(6) between citizens of different states
(7) between a state and citizens of another state
(8) between citizens of the same state claiming land rights in different states; AND
(9) between one state or its citizens and foreign states/citizens

the fed gvt’s power is limited, so the Const must define the scope of its power, which includes these areas of jx given to fed cts.

Question 3

3 - 4 types of cases within SCOTTUS original Jx?

Answer 3

cases involving
(1) ambassadors;
(2) public ministers;
(3) consuls; AND
(4) those where a state is a party

Question 4

5 - concurrent jx

Answer 4

defined as powers that both state and fed courts may excercise concurrently.

If a conflict arises between a state and fed law, the fed law will prevail under the Supremacy clause.

Question 5

6 - difference between Art III and Art I cts?

Answer 5

III: established through the judicial power of the fed gvt

I: created by congress to implement certain legislative powers, such as tax courts and courts of th District of Columbia.

Question 6

7 - scope of appellate jx granted to SCOTUS

Answer 6

SCOTUS has appellate jx:
(1) in all other cases before mentioned” meaning those arising under the const or treaties;
(2) under such Regulations as the Congress shall make

Practically speaking, Congress has provided two methods for invoking the Ct’s appellate jx: MANDATORY APPEAL (which are rare) and through DISCRETIONARY WRITS OF CERTIORARI

Question 7

8 - 4 reqs for Justiciable

Answer 7

SRMP - summer really must persist for case to be reviewable the Court

plaintiff must have STANDING
case must be RIPE for decision
not be MOOT
not involve a POLITICAL QUESTION

Question 8

9 - exceptions to the MOOTNESS req

Answer 8

Cases NOT considered moot, even if they do NOT qualify under the “case/controversy” include:
(1) legal wrong that is capable of repitition yet evading review - meaning the party is likely to experience the injury within a SHORT PERIOD OF TIME and UNABLE TO GET RELIEF (e.g., time sensitive, short term issues such as pregnancy, elections, or divorce actions which would become moot for each complaining party within the time it would take to obtain judicial review); AND
(2) class actions (i.e., a rep of the class may seek out the action if the other members’ claims are still viable)

A case will also not be considered moot if the D voluntarily stops the harmful conduct because legal action is threatened (but may ten freely return to the harmful actions).

Question 9

10 - RIPENESS

Answer 9

for a lawsuit to be RIPE, the action must be an actual, present controversy that is neither SPECULATIVE nor HYPOTHETICAL in nature.

Generally, a case will NOT be heard unless the P has been harmed or threatened with immediate harm. Ripeness bars consideration of claims before they have fully developed.

Question 10

11 - the reqs for establishing STANDING

Answer 10

(1) injury (actual or imminent INJURY IN FACT)
(2) CAUSATION (a causal connection between alleged conduct and injury); AND
(3) REDRESSABILITY (a favorable ruling is likely to redress that harm)

SCOTUS will not hear a case brought by a party who lacks standing at any stage of litigation, including on appeal.

Question 11

12 - What is required for a P to have STANDING to assert the rights of a THIRD PARTY?

Answer 11

IF that third party P has suffered an injury AND
(1) the third party cannot effectively assert their own rights; OR
(2) the P’s injury adversely affects their cognizable, special relationship with the third party

Question 12

13 - 3 req for an organization to have STANDING to sue on behalf of its members?

Answer 12

IF:
(1) individual members have experienced INJURY IN FACT
(2) the members’ injury is RELATED to the org’s purpose;
(3) neither the nature of the claim nor the relief sought requires members to participate in the suit.

An org will also have standing when the alleged conduct causes injury to the org itself.

Question 13

14 - if a P wanted to challenge a govt action, may they establish STANDING based solely on their citizenship?

Answer 13

No - they must have suffered an injury

Question 14

15 - does merely being a taxpayer give a person STANDING?

Answer 14

No

A rare exception allows a taxpayer to challenge federal appropriations and spending if it violates the ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE

Question 15

16 - 2 requirements for a legislator to have STANDING

Answer 15

IF:
(1) have a PERSONAL STAKE in the outcome;
(2) suffered a sufficiently CONCRETE INJURY.

Question 16

17 - ADEQUATE AND INDEPENDENT STATE GROUNDS

Answer 16

SCOTUS will not review a state court decision if it rests entirely on an “adequate and independent” state law ground, meaning the decision can be entirely supported by a state law ground, even if federal issues are involved in the state court’s decision.

The Ct may either dismiss or remand to state court for further clarification.

Question 17

18 - DOCTRINE OF ABSTENTION

Answer 17

Abstention is when a fed ct delines to exercise jx because the federal constitutional issue presented is based on an unsettled question of state law.

If the state ct resolves the state law issue first, the federal ct may not need to hear the case at all.

Question 18

19 - POLITICAL QUESTION

Answer 18

is a legal issue so political in nature that the judiciary cannot effectively resolve it, or constitutionally commited to another branch of govt, so its resolution is left to the legistlative or executive branches.

Fed ct will not rule on political questions.

Question 19

20 - purpose of the 11th AM

Answer 19

is to bar federal cts from hearing suits by either private parties or foreign govts against state govts, unless the state waives its immunity under the 11th Am.

11th Am protects states from being sued in fed ct and does not apply to suits in state court; the doctrine of sovereign immunity protects states from being sued in state court.

Question 20

21 - may congress enact laws allowing private parties to sue states?

Answer 20

Yes - congress may abrogate state immunity by allowing a private citizen to sue a state IF congress is acting under its autority to enforce the 13th, 14th, or 15th Ams.

Question 21

42 - may the fed govt sue a state in fed court without the state’s consent?

Answer 21

Yes - this is an exclusion from the 11th m prohibition.

Question 22

105 - SOVERIGN IMMUNITY

Answer 22

bars a citizen from suing a state in state court, even based on a fed claim, unless the state consents.

SI also bars suit against a state in another state court, and fed administrative agency adjudications against states or state agencies.

SI protects states from being sued in state ct, whereas the 11th Am protects states from being sued in fed ct and does not apply to suits in state ct.

Question 23

1072 - 2 methods for invoking SCOTUS appellate jx?

Answer 23

(1) writ of certiorari: the ct’s DISCRETIONARY review of any civil or criminal case;
(2) MANDATORY appeal: appeals from any three-judge district ct panel regarding injunctive relief.

Congress provides these two avenues for appeal to SCOTUS; mandatory appeals are much less common than discretionary writs.

Question 24

1074 - MOOTNESS

Answer 24

refers to a cause of action in which the issues have ceased to exist OR when a judgement would have no effect upon the controversy.

A live controversy must exist at all stages of review. A case will be dismissed as moot if the circumstances causing P’s harm ceased to exist after P filed the complaint/

Question 25

1076 - STANDING

Answer 25

is the right to bring a suit or other legal action before the court (i.e., one has a stake in the outcome)

Standing means a P has the opportunity to try their case in court, not necessarily that they will win.

Question 26

1078 - adequate state law ground

Answer 26

if fully dispotive, meaning the decision can be supported entirely by state law.

Question 27

1079 - independent state law ground

Answer 27

a decision is based on an independent state law ground if it is not based on a federal case interpretation of an identical federal provision.

Question 28

1579 - When does a fed taxpayer have standing to sue over a fed tax or spending program?

Answer 28

if it violates the Establishment Clause.

This is an exception to the general rule that a taxpayer generally does not have standing to challege how taxes are spent.

Question 29

1580 - is SCOTUS required to hear a claim that comes to it by a writ of certiorari?

Answer 29

No- complete discreation.

Question 30

1581 - for purpose of standing, how may a P show injury?

Answer 30

must show 2 things:
(1) injury in fact - which requires both a particularized injury and an injury that affects the P in an concrete way; AND
(2) causal link between the P’s injury and the conduct at issue (in other words, that the alleged conduct caused the injury)

The injury in fact does NOT have to be economic, it cna be harm to the P’s personal well-being.

Question 31

1582 - when is SCOTUS required to hear a claim that comes to it through the appellate process?

Answer 31

SCOTUS MUST hear appeals from 3-judge federal ct panels that grant or deny injunctive relief.

Question 32

1583 - do declaratory judgements satisfy the case or controversy requirement of justciability?

Answer 32

Yes, for the purposes of claim being justiciable in fed ct.

By contrast, advisory opinions do NOT satisfy the case or controversy requirement.

Question 33

1584 - types of actions NOT barred by the 11th Am?

Answer 33

(a) local govts from being sued in state ct;
(b) actions by the fed govt or oter states against state govts; OR
(c) fed bankfruptcy actions impacting states (however, soverign immunity may protect states from bankruptcy proceedings in state court)

Question 34

1585 - types of suits are PROHIBITED under the 11th Am?

Answer 34

prohibits a fed ct from hearing:
(a) suits against a state govt for money damages, declaratory or injunctive relief where a state is a named party;
(b) suits where retroactive damages would be paid out of a state treasury; AND
(c) suits against state officers for violations of state law.

Question 35

1586 - exceptions to the 11th Am?

Answer 35

may hear suits against state govts if the suit:
(a) is seeking injunction against state officials or a state agency;
(b) is for money damages to be paid out of a state officer’s pocket for violating fed law;
(c) is for money damages that forces the state to pay at some point in the future to comply with a ct order; OR
(d) involves congressional removal of state immunity under the 11th Am for the purpose of preventing discrimination under the 14th Am.

Question 36

1587 - does the 11th Am apply to both diversity and fed Q?

Answer 36

Yes

Question 37

1588 - required for a state to consent to a suit in fed ct

Answer 37

The state must expressly and unequivocally waive its 11th Am immunity