Justiciability Flashcards
After a federal judge is convicted on impeachment charges by a majority vote in the United States Senate based on sexual harassment allegations by former law clerks, the judge files suit in federal court asserting that his impeachment conviction was unconstitutional because the harassment was not a “high crime and misdemeanor” under Article II. A court reviewing the suit is most likely to
Grant the motion to dismiss, because the activist’s case is non-justiciable.
An unsuccessful applicant to the state medical college sued the college in federal court, claiming that its use of race in admissions violated the Fourteenth Amendment. The applicant claimed that the admissions department attempted to match the percentages of racial minorities in each year’s incoming class with the percentage of those minorities in the state population. While suit was pending, the reviewing court ordered the applicant to be admitted. The district court ruled for the applicant; the state appealed. While the case was on appeal, the applicant graduated. The reviewing court should:
Dismiss the case as moot.
Article I, § 9, cl. 7 states that “a regular Statement of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.” The budget of the intelligence community, however, is classified and never published. A concerned citizen files suit against the proper parties in federal court alleging that the classification of the intelligence budget is unconstitutional and should be made public. Should a judge hear the case?
No, because the plaintiff lacks standing on account of lacking a sufficiently personal injury.
In order to encourage citizens’ vigilance in the defense of constitutional liberties, Congress passes a statute that authorizes suit in federal district court by “any person” who asserts a “credible claim” that any act of Congress or action of any executive official violates the Constitution. After reading a newspaper account of a “kill or capture list” of suspected terrorists that allegedly contains the names of American citizens, Rand sues in federal district court under the new statute. A reviewing court should:
Dismiss the suit, because Congress cannot authorize courts to hear cases in which the plaintiff lacks a concrete injury.
After the President of the United States orders American troops into combat in Nation B without a formal declaration of war from Congress, an anti-war activist and American citizen, files a suit in federal court alleging that the military action violates the Constitution because the President has exceeded her commander-in-chief powers under Article II. In response, the President files a motion to dismiss. A reviewing court is most likely to:
Grant the motion to dismiss, because the activist’s case is non-justiciable.
