federal_courts_-_outline_i_index_(parmet,_spring_2000)

federal_courts_-_outline_i_index_(parmet,_spring_2000) -...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Federal Courts Outline I Index (Parmet, Spring 2000) i FEDERAL COURTS JUSTICIABILITY............................................................................................................. 1 Ban on Advisory Opinions............................................................................................................ 2 Must be an actual case or controversy 1. Letters to the Justices......................................................................................................................2 USSC does not give advisory opinions Muskrat v. United States .................................................................................................................2 No adverse parties or concrete claims, therefore no case or controversy Ripeness .......................................................................................................................................... 3 Review is not appropriate when the injury is speculative and premature Abbott Labs v. Gardner ..................................................................................................................3 Court allowed pre-enforcement review of labeling regulation because of the hardship in making them wait for review Standing ......................................................................................................................................... 3 The determination is whether a specific person is the proper party to bring a matter to the court - Need to analyze with particularity to relief sought-likelihood of it happening again Constitutional Standing Requirements............................................................................ 4 1. Injury has suffered or will imminently suffer a personal injury 2. Traceability the injury is traceable to the Defendant 3. Redressability the remedy sought is likely to redress the injury Allen v. Wright ........................................................................................................................4 Parents of Black children did not have standing to bring suit against the IRS challenging an IRS policy Federal Election Commission v. Akins ...................................................................................5 A group of voters who challenged an FEC decision did have standing because the relevant statute stated that any aggrieved party could challenge the commissions activity. Prudential Standing Requirements ............................................................................................. 4 Is the plaintiff arguably within the zone of interest to be protected or regulated by the statute? Congress may override, dont worry about prudential requirements if Congress had created standing National Credit Union Administration v. First National Bank &Trust Co. ....................................5 Banks that brought suit against the Credit Union Administration claiming that they misinterpreted the Credit Union Act were arguably within the zone of interest...
View Full Document

Page1 / 12

federal_courts_-_outline_i_index_(parmet,_spring_2000) -...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online