The Courts have the responsibility to prevent over-reach by either the Executive or the Congressional branches of the government. They can hear any case properly brought before them, lacking jurisdiction in the following instances:

• Political Question Doctrine:
  • Premised on the separation of powers and the inherent limits of judicial abilities.
    • Separation of Powers: the court can not interject itself into the vested power of another branch.
      •  All the courts can do it to make sure that the branches are working together. It can not get in the middle of how they exercise their power.
      • NOT all Foreign Affairs questions are political questions.
    • Limits of judicial ability: the court does not have the ability to make a rational decision because of a lack of information and facts.
      •  There is a lack of ‘judicially manageable standards.’
•    Ripeness:
  • The method by which the courts avoid giving advisory opinions.
  • Must have a case in controversy
    • Must be at a constitutional impasse
    • Requires the President to be in Tier 3 and the will of Congress to be clear.
      •  If the President is in the zone of twilight the issue is not ripe
• Standing:
  • Two part test:
    • The plaintiff has personally suffered actual or threatened harm
    • The injury can be traced back to the challenged action and is likely to be redresses by a favorable decision.
  • Legislative Standing: actions of the executive will have to completely nullify the votes of the legislator.
    • Bare minimum: if congress votes and the president acts in direct opposition to the majority vote.
    • Congress must use their vested power to stop the president’s war time action; they can not rely on the court to stop him.
  • Standing ALWAYS exist for the person who will suffer due to the actions of the government.
    • ex) the solider being sent off to war
  • Must have a ripe dispute to have standing.