The Federal Judicial Power

Question 1

This doctrine must be satisfied in order for a case to be heard by a federal court?

Answer 1

Justiciability

Question 2

How can Justiciability be established?

Answer 2

1.) Standing 2.) Ripeness 3.) Mootness 4.) The political question doctrine

Question 3

How can one establish that they have standing?

What won’t be allowed to prove standing?

Answer 3

By showng:

1. ) Injury- P must show that they have been or will be personally and adversely affected
2. ) Causation - must be a connection between the conduct and the injury
3. ) Redressability- Win in litigants favor will fix their grievance

• No third party standing
  
  • Exception: Plaintiff with their own standing may assert right of others if: 1.) it is difficult for the party to asser their own right or
  • A special relationship exist between the claimant and the third party.
• No generalized grievances
  
  • Exception: “taxpayer” has standing to challenge government expenditure money regarding federal or statutes as violating the Establishment Clause

Question 4

Seeking injunctive or declaratory relief, what must you show?

Answer 4

Liklihood of future harm

Question 5

(TOSS IT) How do you establish Causation and redressability?

Answer 5

P must allege and prove that the D is the individual who caused the harm

Question 6

What are the exceptions to 3rd party standing?

Answer 6

3rd party standing is allowed if: 1.) there is a close relationship between the P and the injured 3rd party 2.) 3rd party is unlikely to be able to assert their own rights 3.) organization may sue for its members if: - the members would have standing to sue - the interest are germane to the organization’s purpose -neither the claim nor relief requires participation of individual members

Question 7

When is there a generalized grievance?

Answer 7

When the P is suing solely as a “citizen” or as a “taxpayer” against the government.

Question 8

How is ripeness established?

Answer 8

Immediate threat of harm

1.) The hardship that would be suffered without pre-enforcement. (The greater the hardship, the more likely the court will hear the issue) 2.) Does the court have what it needs to review or should it wait on other proceedings?

Question 9

What is Mootness? Exceptions to Mootness:

Answer 9

A real controversy must exist at all stages of review.

(If events after the filing of a lawsuit end the plaintiff’s injury then it will be recognized as moot and can’t be brought before the court.)

Exception: -injury is capable of repetition but evading review.

(Roe v. Wade) -Voluntary cession (if D can hault offending conduct, but is free to resume at any time, the case wont be dismissed. - class action suits (Least tested)

Question 10

What is the political question doctrine?

Example of political questions that won’t be adjudicated in federal court.

Answer 10

This doctrine refers to the constitutional violations that the federal courts will not adjudicate. Can’t bring a political question to the court. Won’t satisfy justiciability.

1. ) The “republican form of government clause” (Case dimissed)
2. ) Challenges to the President’s conduct of foreign policy
3. ) Challenges to the impeachment and removal process (i.e. Nixon challenging the Senate)
4. ) Challenges to partisan gerrymandering

Question 11

How do Cases come to the Supreme Court?

What if an appeal is sought after a 3 judge federal court?

Answer 11

By writ of certiorari. (Discretion of the Supreme Court to hear cases) (Ex: cases from state court where 1.) costitutioality of federal law, treaty, state statute is at issue.)

Appeals sought after 3 judge federal court. Sup. Ct. must hear. (Only a handful of cases are heard in a 3 judge federal district court. Skips Ct. of Appeals)

Question 12

When will the Supreme Court have original and exclusive jurisdiction over a case?

Answer 12

Suits between state governments.

Question 13

Can the Supreme Court hear a case if the prior case rests on two grounds, one state and the other federal, and reversing the ruling on the federal will not change anything?

Answer 13

No, because the state court judgment rests on adequate and independent state law.

The Sup. Ct. only handles the federal claims If the state law claim is independent of federal claim and the case rests on that state claim then there’s no point in having review.

(If state does’nt clearly indicate

Question 14

True or False: Federal courts hear suits against state governments?

Answer 14

False. States cant be sued and made defendants. (Doctine of soverign immunity.)

Question 15

Name of the principle that bars suits against states in state courts of federal agencies?

What are the exceptions?

Answer 15

Doctrine of Sovereign immunity.

1. ) Consent
2. ) Congress can authorize suits against states under power of section 5 of the 14th amendment
3. ) The federal gov. may sue state govenments
4. ) Bankruptcy proceedings Only instances when gov. can be named as defendant

Question 16

Sovereign immunity True of False: State officer may be sued?

If so, for what?

Answer 16

True

State officers may be sued for:

1. ) injunctive relief
2. ) money damages out of their own pockets BUT may not be sued if it is the state paying retroactively for their damages

Question 17

What is abstention?

Answer 17

States that federal courts may hold off on resolving a constitutional claim when the case rest on pending state court proceedings/ unsettled question of state law