What would be the impact of the injunction if issued at this point?
End Result?
What is the court's holding?
Do you think the United States Supreme Court would ever really decide this type of case?
Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 217 (1962)
Prominent on the surface of any case held to involve a political question is found a textually demonstrable constitutional commitment of the issue to a coordinate political department; or
a lack of judicially discoverable and manageable standards for resolving it; or the impossibility of deciding without an initial policy determination of a kind clearly for non-judicial discretion; or
the impossibility of a court’s undertaking independent resolution without expressing lack of respect due coordinate branches of government; or an unusual need for unquestioning adherence to a political decision already made; or
the potentiality of embarrassment from multifarious pronouncements by various departments on one question.
Ange v. Bush, 752 F Supp 509 (1990)
What was plaintiff's claim in this case?
What would be the effect on the military if plaintiff prevails?
Why does plaintiff have the same standing problems as Congress?
Will it make any difference to his or Congress' standing once the order to invade is given?
How does Judge Lambert argue that this is a classic political question?
The Problem of Standards for War Powers Cases
Does the constitution clearly prevent the president from using troops to invade other countries?
Has the president done this without a declaration of war since the beginning?
What standard could a court use to decide that a military action is illegal?
Why does being against a law passed by Congress not solve the problem?
What does Judicial Abstention Mean to Separation of Powers?
Who "wins" when the court invokes political question abstention in a war powers case?
Does this shift the balance of powers between the branches of the government?
Is this better than the separation of powers problem posed if the court intervened in a war powers case?
Are the courts right to stay out of war powers cases?
Why did the plaintiff claim that it was unconstitutional for Congressmen to be National Guard Officers?
What constitutional provision does this violate?
What is the separation of powers problem?
The Ruling
‘‘standing to sue may not be predicated upon an interest of the kind alleged here which is held in common by all members of the public, because of the necessarily abstract nature of the injury all citizens share.’’
Why?
Putting aside the court's ruling, do the plaintiffs have a valid constitutional argument?