Law Outlines Federal Courts Outlines
All of the notes you will ever need for a Federal Courts final examination. Contains notes on cases, Restatements, statutes, the Constitution, and more....
The following is a more accessible plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our Federal Courts Outlines. Due to the challenges of extracting text from PDFs, it will have odd formatting:
Exam
Organize by issue
The first issue here is jurisdiction, then IRAC, the next issue is XYZ, then IRAC
IRAC – apply the law to the facts: here is the issue, here is the law that applies (doctrine – citing cases/treaty provisions), here is how it is applied to the facts
60% all your arguments, 30% all counter arguments, 10% counter to counter
use the cases’ principles/argument in my arguments (don’t need to distinguish cases from one another)
“this is like Marbury because…”
analogize the case to the facts/reasoning/holding
Statutory Interpretation:
Constitutional Avoidance
Federal statutes should be construed, where possible, so that they do not violate the Cons.
Interpret statues to avoid serious cons. questions or serious cons. doubts
Structure for Exam:
Two sources of justiciability doctrine:
Art. III interpretation
Art. III § 2 requires that judiciary can hear only “cases” and “controversies”
Prudential requirements
Derive from prudent judicial administration
Distinguish:
Congress can override prudential requirements
Congress cannot override Art. III requirements unless with Cons. Amendment
Other Considerations:
Article III Standing
Injury in fact
Causation
Redressability
Sub-Article III Doctrines
Ripeness
Mootness
Federal Courts are Courts of Limited Jurisdiction:
Cases & Controversies specified in Article III of Cons.
Except for cases falling within the original jurisdiction of the SC, federal courts cannot hear case unless Congress has authorized it – statutory subject matter jurisdiction
Policy Concerns:
Separation of Powers
Justiciability doctrine defines judicial role
Determines when it is appropriate for federal courts to review a matter, and when necessary to defer to other branches of government
Conserving Judicial Resources
Federal courts are limited to focusing attention on matters most deserving of review
Limits cases to where there is adversary-ness
Adversarial parties, with stake in outcome, will best present fully all relevant information
General:
Court has power to say what Constitution means (Marbury)
Court may refuse to give effect to act of Congress where, in the Court’s view, the act is repugnant to the Cons. (Marbury)
Congress may not expand SCOTUS Art. III jurisdiction beyond that in Cons. (Marbury)
Congress cannot add to categories of cases enumerated in Art. III
Court must have jurisdiction to hear case!
Court’s Decisions Are Limited to Cases & Controversies, Congress cannot expand power
Marbury v. Madison (1803)
F: Marbury appointed for a position by previous Pres., but new Pres., refused to finalize the appointment by delivering commission. Marbury sought a writ of mandamus from the SC to compel the Pres. to deliver the commission and finalize the appointment.
H: Where the Cons. of the US, as interpreted by the SC, conflicts with the laws enacted by Congress, the SC may declare such laws unconstitutional and invalid. While a mandamus is the proper remedy in this case, and the Judiciary Act of 1789 gives the SC the power to issue writs of mandamus against persons holding office in the US, the statute is uncons. and cannot be given effect. Article III of the Cons. does not grant original jurisdiction to the SC over cases involving executive officers, and Congress cannot expand original jurisdiction of the Court beyond the Cons. – only appellate. And it is emphatically the province and duty of the judiciary to say what the law is. Also, side note: There are rights that have no remedies, such as political questions and discretionary decisions.
Exam:
Answering the question:
This is a question of standing because ______
P does/doesn’t have standing because ______
This is consistent w/ justiciability policy / separation of powers concerns crucial to standing analysis because ____
General:
Requirements
#1: Plaintiff must suffer an injury, either actual or threatened
#2: The injury must be fairly traceable to the defendant’s conduct (causation)
#3: the injury must likely to be redressed by a favorable judicial decision (redressability)
Prudential Standing Requirements (which can be overcome by Congress)
Party generally may not raise the claims of third parties not before the court
P may not use as TP who shares grievance in common with all other TPs
Jurisdictional Consideration
Other Forms of Standing
Standing from citizen provision
Standing for legislator
Standing to appeal
Third party standing
Separation of Powers Concerns
Internal Article III
Courts ensuring that they are adjudicating only cases + controversies
Other matters – defer to other branches of government
Business of courts is to decide matters in adversarial context
Adverse parties with stake in outcome will best present fully all relevant info
Ensure that party with the best-case wins
External to Article III
Courts can refuse cases that are better served by other gov’t branches
Ex: generalized grievance—people can secure rights through political process
Legislature can respond
Focus on Article I
Prevents Congress from using courts to battle the executive branch
Courts don’t want to be lever used by Congress to fight the executive
When thinking about standing:
Identity
Closer P is to actual injury, more likely for standing
Closer D is to P, more likely for causation
Individuation
More injury is unique to P, more likely to have standing
Incentives
Greater incentive to litigate, more adversary-ness, more likely to have standing
Procedural Stages
How does standing look different at different procedural stages?
Motion to dismiss – just looking at complaint
SMJ – looking at actual factual evidence like affidavits
No taxpayer standing
Except first amendment religious endorsement/exercise cases
#1 Injury:
No connection necessary between injury necessary for...
Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our Federal Courts Outlines.
All of the notes you will ever need for a Federal Courts final examination. Contains notes on cases, Restatements, statutes, the Constitution, and more....
Ask questions 🙋 Get answers 📔 It's simple 👁️👄👁️
Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.
Get Started