justiciable questions Reference library
The Oxford Guide to the United States Government
... questions The U.S. Supreme Court has held that federal courts may deal only with cases or questions that are justiciable, that is, questions “appropriate for judicial determination” ( Aetna Life Insurance Co. v. Haworth , 1937 ). In the Aetna case Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes discussed the differences between justiciable questions or issues and those not justiciable. He emphasized that justiciable questions involve a “real and substantial controversy” that can be resolved by a conclusive decision of a court of law. The U.S. Supreme Court...
justiciable questions
justiciability
Ripeness and Immediacy
Davis v. Bandemer
political questions
Treaties and Treaty Power
Political Thicket
Dismissal of 1975
Wesberry v. Sanders
standing to sue
Gomillion v. Lightfoot
appellate jurisdiction
Baker v. Carr
advisory Opinions
elections
justiciability Reference library
Australian Law Dictionary (3 ed.)
...justiciability A justiciable matter is one that is appropriate for judicial determination; is within a court’s jurisdiction to entertain; is capable of being granted appropriate relief; and (in the case of administrative actions) is capable of or susceptible to judicial review . Justiciability is closely associated with the exercise of judicial power by courts as the sole concern of the judicial branch of government. However, it can be difficult to distinguish between ‘judicial’ and ‘non-judicial’, and the High Court has not dealt with the question...
Justiciability Reference library
William M. Wiecek
The Oxford Companion to the Supreme Court of the United States (2 ed.)
...specific relief through a decree of a conclusive character” (p. 241). Justiciability is a conceptual umbrella covering several related doctrines or problems, including standing , mootness , and ripeness . It prohibited federal courts from rendering advisory opinions and, until the 1934 Declaratory Judgment Act (upheld in Aetna ), declaratory judgments as well. It excludes collusive suits and political questions from federal jurisdiction. Conceptual problems of justiciability helped frame the issues in the leading reapportionment case of Baker ...
political questions Reference library
The Oxford Guide to the United States Government
...is a limitation that the Court has imposed upon its own powers of judicial review. Only the Supreme Court itself decides which cases involve political questions, thereby disqualifying them for review and judgment by the Court. Such political questions are referred to as non-justiciable. Justiciable questions, by contrast, are those the Supreme Court accepts as appropriate for its review and judgment. In Pacific States Telephone & Telegraph v. Oregon ( 1912 ), the Court faced an issue that it decided was outside the scope of judicial review. The issue...
dispute Reference library
Encyclopaedic Dictionary of International Law (3 ed.)
...that some disputes are justiciable and others are non-justiciable, but ‘probably today most writers would regard it as depending upon the attitude of the parties: if, whatever the subject matter of the dispute may be, what the parties seek is their legal rights, the dispute is justiciable: if, on the other hand, one of them at least is not content to demand its legal rights, but demands the satisfaction of some interest of its own even though this may require a change in the existing legal situation, the dispute is non-justiciable’: Brierly, The Law of...
