Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In United States constitutional law, the political question doctrine holds that a constitutional dispute that requires knowledge of a non-legal character or the use of techniques not suitable for a court or explicitly assigned by the Constitution to the U.S. Congress, or the President of the United States, lies within the political, rather than the legal, realm to solve, and judges customarily ...
Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186 (1962), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that redistricting qualifies as a justiciable question under the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause, thus enabling federal courts to hear Fourteenth Amendment-based redistricting cases.
Political Question Doctrine, Kelsen theory, legality of government and Constitution, legal order Uganda v. Commissioner of Prisons, Ex Parte Michael Matovu, [ 1 ] [1966] 1 EA 514, is a decision of the High Court of Uganda in which Hans Kelsen 's "General Theory on Law and State" [ 2 ] and the Political Question Doctrine were considered in ...
For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us
The Supreme Court of the United States has interpreted the Case or Controversy Clause of Article III of the United States Constitution (found in Art. III, Section 2, Clause 1) as embodying two distinct limitations on exercise of judicial review: a bar on the issuance of advisory opinions, and a requirement that parties must have standing.
Pages in category "United States political question doctrine case law" The following 17 pages are in this category, out of 17 total. This list may not reflect recent changes .
Luther v. Borden, 48 U.S. (7 How.) 1 (1849), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States established the political question doctrine in controversies arising under the Guarantee Clause of Article Four of the United States Constitution (Art.
Rucho v. Common Cause, No. 18-422, 588 U.S. 684 (2019) is a landmark case of the United States Supreme Court concerning partisan gerrymandering. [1] The Court ruled that while partisan gerrymandering may be "incompatible with democratic principles", the federal courts cannot review such allegations, as they present nonjusticiable political questions outside the jurisdiction of these courts.