justiciability & fed court power Flashcards
standing
The federal court will not hear a case unless the party bringing the suit has standing.
to have standing, a litigant must have a concrete stake in the outcome of the controversy
* a litigant will have a concrete steak if the litigant can show (1) that it has suffered an injury in fact, (2) that is caused by the conduct complained, and (3) that can be remedied by a decision in the litigants favor
IIF, causation, and redressability,
IIF
Ps must allege and prove that they have been injured or imminently will be injured. Ps may only assert injuries that they have personally suffered
* specific and not theoretical but need not be economic
injunctive/declaratory:
* Ps seeking injunctive or declaratory relief must show a likelihood of future harm
causation & rederessability
P must allege and prove that the defendant caused the injury (causation) so that a favorable court decision is likely to remedy the injury (redressability)
3rd party standing
generally a P cannot assert claims of third aprties who are not before the court but exceptions where P has standing AND (1) there is a close relationship between the plaintiff and the injured third party or (2) the injured third party is unlikely to be able to assert his or her own rights; and for an orgnaiazitons where its members would have standing to sue; the interests are germane to the org’s purpose, and neither claim nor the relief requires participation of individual members
generalized grievances
no standing for generalized grievances: the P must not be suing solely as a citizen or as a taxpayer interested in having the gov’t follow the law
Generally, taxpayers lack standing to challenge federal appropriations, but taxpayers have standing to challenge government expenditures pursuant to federal (or state and local) statutes as violating the Establishment Clause
* example: Taxpayer has standing to challenge federal law providing monetary aid to parochial schools
ripeness
Ripeness is the question of whether a federal court may grant pre-enforcement review of a statute or regulation
FC considers two main factors:
1. hardhsip that will be suffered without pre-enforcement review
2. fitness of the issues and the record for judicial review
mootness
if events after the filing of a lawsuit end the plaintiff’s injury, the case must be dismissed as moot
need for live controversy
exceptions:
1. wrong capable of repetition but evading review
* could happen again to that P
2. voluntary cessation
* if the D voluntarily halts the offending conduct, but is free to resume it at any time, the case will not be dismissed as moot
3. class actions
* class action will not be dismissed if the named P’s claim becomes moot so long as one member of the class has an ongoing injury
political question doctrine
allegations of constitutional violations that the federal courts will not adjudicate
four types
1. questions under the republican form of gov’t clause
2. challenges to the president’s conduct of foreign policy
3. challenges to the impeachment and removal process
4. challenges to partisan gerrymandering
state court review
For the Supreme Court to review a state court decision, there must not be an independent and adequate state law ground of decision.
soverign immunity
The 11th Am bars suits against states in federal court
Sovereign immunity bars suits against states in state courts or federal agencies
exceptions
* waiver
* abrogation: States may be sued pursuant to federal laws adopted under section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment
* fed gov’t and other states may sue state gov’ts
* bankruptcy proceedings and suits pursuant to cong’s power to raise an army and navy
suit agent state officers allower
* state officers may be sued for injunctive relief but not $ damages where thes tate treasury will be liable for retroactive damages
abstention
Federal courts may not enjoin pending state court proceedings
