Powers of Federal Court
Essay by susanheikkila • March 12, 2019 • Study Guide • 3,907 Words (16 Pages) • 817 Views
Page 1 of 16
- Does gov't have the power to act?
- Federal must have express authority
- CONGRESS! Can’t act in general welfare
- Fed courts must hear cases only which have statutory
- State and local can do anything except that which is prohibited by constitution
- POLICE POWER
- Has gov't violated a limit on it's authority
- Amendments
- Due Process Equal Protection
Powers of Federal Court
- Must be constitutional authority
- Statutory authority
States Can hear anything unless exclusive federal court jxd
FEDERAL JUDICIAL POWER
- Cases and Controversies0- defines constitutional law authority
- Article 3 Section 2 defines judicial power
- Giving rise to a series of limits to federal judicial power
- Justiciability Doctrines
- Standing- whether P is proper party to bring a matter to court for ajudication
- MOST IMPORTANT
- Requirements:
- Injury- allege and prove that she has been or imminently will be injured (P may only present personally suffered injuries) if P is seeking injunctive or declaratory relief must show future harm
- Causation and redressability- D caused the injury so favorable decision will remedy the injury
- No third-party standing is allowed
- Exceptions
- Sufficiently close relationship (third party is allowed); P can adequately represent interests of 3P (doctor/patient)
- Injured 3P can't assert his own rights
- Organizational standing- members must have standing; interest must relate to organization's purpose; neither claim nor relief must require individuals participation
- No generalized grievances are allowed- P must not be suing solely as a citizen or taxpayer interested in government follow the law- BUT taxpayers can challenge gov't expenditures pursuant to a staute for violating the establishment clause
- Ripeness- may the federal court grant pre-enforcement review of a statute or regulation
- Must really be a case
- Is there a request for declaratory judgment?
- Hardship P will suffer without review
- Fitness of the issues in the record for judicial review
- Abbot- FDA adopted rule for generic name on label, moved to dismiss on ripeness bc no drug companies had been prosecuted on violating rule
- Great hardship- drug companies would have to either break rule and break law or comply and lose millions
- Fitness- q of law; nothing to be gained by waiting
- RIPE!
- Mootness (must not be moot)
- If events after initial filing of lawsuit end P's injury, case dismissed as moot
- Must present live controversy in all stages
- Exception: wrongs capable of repetition
- Roe v Wade- injury was over but could still decide bc capable of repetition, could become pregnant again
- Voluntary cessation:
- Class action suits- one member of class has ongoing injury
- Political Question- allegations of constitutional violations that fed court will not adjudicate; left to judicial branch (must not pose political q)
- Cases under Republican form of government clause-// GUARANTEE CLAUSE art 4 sec 4; nonjusticiable
- Challenges to Pres. Conduct to foreign policy
- Challenges to impeachment and removal process
- Nixon v. US- challenging impeachment and
- Challenges to partisan gerrymandering
- Political P that controls leg. Draws election district to maximize seats
- Supreme Court Review
- Writ of Certiorari- court has complete discretion (4 votes)
- All cases by USCOA go by Certiorari
- Appeals exist only for SCOTUS decision by three judge federal district courts
- If statute says its appeal, SCOTUS must take, only one instance, 3 judge fed. District court
- Original and exclusive jxd to hear suits between state gov'ts
- Marbury v. Madison- Congress cannot expand original jxd of the supreme court, limited to just that enumerated in article 3
- Only after there's a final judgment
- Must not be an independent and adequate state law ground of decision
- If a state court decision rests on two grounds (fed & state), if supreme court reversal of federal law will not change case, can't hear it
- Lower Federal Court Review
- All justiciability must be met
- Federal courts can't ask for suits against state governments
- Principal of sovereign immunity- 11th amendment bars suits against state gov'ts in federal court
- Exceptions to sovereign immunity-
- Waiver- state gov't can consent, must be explicit
- Pursuant to fed. Statutes adopted by congress under sec 5 of 14th amendment by congress can't override SI with any other powers
- Fed gov't may sue state gov't
- Bankruptcy
- State officers may be sued (unless state treasury would be liable for retroactive damages-- unless indemnification that’s ok
- Obstention- instances where fed court has jxd but does not exercise it
FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE POWER
- Congress's authority to act
- Congress may act only if express or implied authority
- No general federal police power
- Necessary and proper clause
- Article 1 sec 8
- McCulloch v. Maryland- Congress may choose any means not prohibited by constitution to carry out lawful authority (bake sale)
- Taxing spending and commerce clause powers
- Art 1 sec 8- important
- Congress may tax and spend for the general welfare- may create any tax to raise revenue and
- NFIB v. Civ.- Obamacare SCOTUS says individual mandate was exercise of taxing power
- Commerce clause
- Regulate commerce with foreign nations, among states
- 37-95- broadly defined scope of authority
- 95- US v. Lopez: gun-free school zone act- SCOTUS declare unconstitutional, exceeded scope, congress can act under clause:
- May regulate channels of interstate commerce
- Places, highways, waterways, internet
- Instrumentalities, and persons/things in interstate commerce
- Gibbons v Ogden- commerce refers to all forms of intercourse, goes across state lines- John Marshall's definition
- Substantial effect
- Wickard- wheat, growing for family; upheld federal law and ruled against farmer, looking at all wheat that all farmers grew for home consumption, taken cumulatively, there was a substantial effect on prices
- Gonzalez v. Raich- marijuana for personal use- fed controlled substance act was upheld bc crop is bought and sold for interstate commerce, reducing that crop is interstate commerce, when looking cumulatively across country it has substantial effect
- Morrison- When it comes to non-economic activity, substantial effect cannot be looked at cumulatively (can't be based on cumulative impact)
- NFIB- Can't regulate inactivity (wasn't constitutional based on commerce power, congress was regulating inactivity)
- 10th amendment- all powers not granted to US nor prohibited to states are reserved to states and people respectively
- Limit on federal powers
- Congress cannot compel state legislative or regulatory activity
- NY v. US- radioactive waste disposal act
- Congress was comandeering the states
- Prince v. US- comandeering= forcing states to have lawss
- Strings on grants
- Clearly stated
- Related to purpose of program
- Not unduly coercive
- NFIB- states are so dependent on medicaid money that it was coercive
- Congress may prohibit harmful commercial activity by state governments
- Congress's power under sec 5 of 14th amendment
- Can't create new rights or expand scope of rights
- Legislate or prevent violation of rights already recognized by courts
- Laws must be proportionate and congruent (narrowly tailored) to prove constitutional violations
- DELEGATION of power
- Non-delegation doctrine- congress could not delegate in excess of legislative power
- Legislative vetoes and line-item vetoes are ALWAYS unconstitutional
- For congress to act must be: Bicameralism (passage by both houses), and presentment (signed by president)
- Legislative veto is where they try to overturn an action without one of above
- Line-item- veto part of bill while signing rest into law; must sign whole bill or veto whole bill
- Congress cannot delegate power to itself or officers
FEDERAL EXECUTIVE POWER
- Article two- powers of president
- Foreign Policy
- Treaties- negotiated by president and effective when ratified by senate
- State laws that conflict with treaties are invalid- treaty w canada of
- Conflict with treaty and federal statute the one adopted last in time controls
- Treaties are unconstitutional if they violate the constitution
- Executive Agreements
- Agreement between foreign country and US negotiated by Pres and effective when signed by
- No Senate approval
- May be used for any purpose
- Executive Agreements prevail over conflicting state laws, but never over federal laws or const.
- President has broad powers as Commander in Chief to use American troops in foreign countries
- Never been declared unconstitutional
- Domestic Affairs
- Appointment and Removal Power
- Who possesses? President appoints ambassadors, federal judges, and officers of the united states; senate must approve nomination (but Pres has sole power to appoint)
- Congress may vest appointment of inferior officers in President, heads of departments, or lower federal courts
- Distinction not clearly defined- inferior officer can be fired by an office of the U.S. (AG may fire US attorneys, inferior officers)
- Congress cannot give appointment power to itself or its officers
- Giving itself an executive power
- President may not make recess appointments for intrasession recesses less than 10 days
- NLRB- recess between holidays
- Removal Power
- Unless limited by a federal statute, President may remove any executive branch official
- But Congress by statute may limit removal if both of two requirements are met
- Must be an office where independence of the President is desirable (independent counsel) vs Congress can't limit removal of cabinet
- Statute must not prohibit removal- it can limit removal to where there's good cause
- Most they can do is say removal is allowed only if good cause is shown
- President has immunity to civil suits for money damages for anything done while in office
- Nixon v. Fitzgerald
- Don't have immunity for acts that allegedly occurred prior to taking office
- Clinton v. Jones- immunity exists at exercise of discretion while in office
- Executive privilege protects presidential papers and convos but must yield when there is an overriding need
- US v. Nixon- Watergate- this power is not absolute, privilege must yirld when overriding need for info, need for info in criminal trial outweighs privilege
INTERGOV'T ACTIONS
- Preemption
- Article 6- Supremacy Clause: state or local law is deemed preempted if there is a conflict
- Ways:
- Express: Federal statute explicitly says federal law is exclusive in a field, then state and local laws are preempted
- Implied: (1) if federal law and state law are mutually exclusive (conflicts preemption- not possible to simultaneously comply with fed and state- maple syrup bottles) but states can set stricter laws than fed laws, (2) state or local law impedes the achievement of a federal objective (object preemption), (3) if congress evidences a clear intent to preempt state/local laws then they are preempted (immigration law)
- States cannot tax or regulate federal government activity
- McCullogh v. Maryland- power to tax is power to destroy; unconstitutional to pay a state tax out of the federal treasury `
- Dormant Commerce Clause & Privileges/Immunities Clause - Article 4
- When do state/local laws violate
- Definitions
- Dormant Commerce Clause- principle that state and local laws are unconstitutional if they place an undue burden on interstate commerce
- Limit on what state and local governments can do-- who is the actor in question (if it’s a challenge to something state/local gov't has done)
- Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article 4- no state may deprive citizens of other states of privileges and immunities it gives its own citizens
- Anti-discrimination provision to out-of-state citizens; limits
- Privileges or Immunities Clause of 14th Amendment- used only by SCOTUS to protect right to interstate travel
- Protect people of their own state governments
- Protect right to travel
- Does state or local law discriminate against out of state citizens
- Or does it treat in state and out of state alike
- What If it does not discriminate?
- Privilege/immunities of article 4 does not apply
- If law puts a burden on interstate commerce, it violates the dormant commerce clause if burden outweighs benefits in law
- Illinois law required curved mudflaps- did not discriminate but still unconstitutional because burden on drivers, would have to avoid state or change flaps
- Analysis When it Does Discriminate
- If law puts burden on interstate commerce, it violates dormant commerce clause unless its necessary to achieve a very important gov't purpose
- State gov't must show there is a very important interest served (like strict scrutiny)
- Law is necessary to achieve that objective, no less discriminatory alternative can achieve its objective
- Exceptions to Dormant CC:
- Congressional Approval- if congress has approved state law, its then permissible even if it violates dormant CC (because Commerce power is no longer dormant)
- Market Participant Exception- state gov't may favor its own citizens in receiving benefits from gov't programs or in dealing with gov't owned businesses
- University of CA can charge less in tuition to in-state residents and more to out of state; allowed because university is a govt benefit program, residents have been paying taxes, reward them
- State of SD owned and operated cement factory, charged less to in state; upheld SD law bc gov't owned and operated business, gov't was literally the market participant
- Privileges/Immunities Clause
- State gov't violates clause when discriminating against out of state to earn living unless
- Requirements
- Must be discrimination against out of state citizens
- Discrimination must be with regard to fundamental rights or ability to earn one's livelihood (although fundamental usually is 1st am.)
- VA public records act- no fundamental right of access to public records
- Earn living- fishing license- out of state $2500, in state $25 BUT compare to elk hunting case is a HOBBY
- Corporations and aliens cannot provoke this provision
- If P is a corporation, challenging state or local law DO NOT USE P/I CLAUSE USE ONLY DORMANT CC
- Only if used to achieve substantial gov't interest
- START:
- Discriminates out of state?
- State/Local Taxation on Interstate Commerce
- States may not use their tax systems to help in state businesses at the expense of out of state businesses (tax credit for only purchasing ethanol in state; smaller tax for purchasing dairy in state)
- State may only tax activities that are of substantial connection to that state
- State taxation of interstate companies must be fairly apportioned
- Full Faith and Credit
- Court that's in one state must enforce judgment of another state so long as all 3 are met:
- Court that issued judgment must have had both personal jurisdiction and SMJ
- Judgment must be on merits
- Judgment must be final
...
...
Only available on OtherPapers.com