Justiciability

We are about to spend a few days exploring the concept of justiciability, i.e. a collection of doctrines that seek to determine the scope of the judicial power of the federal courts under the Constitution. "Thus, no justiciable controversy is presented when the parties seek adjudication of only a political question, when the parties are asking for an advisory opinion, when the question sought to be adjudicated has been mooted by subsequent developments, and when there is no standing to maintain the action." (Casebook p. 66).

We will be spending a lot of energy discussing various aspects of each of the boldfaced terms concerning justiciability.

Here is how Erwin Chemerinsky defines the concept of "justiciability:"

Perhaps the most important limit on the federal judicial power is imposed by a series of principles termed "justiciability" doctrines. The justiciability doctrines determine which matters federal courts can hear and decide and which must be dismissed. Specifically, justiciability included the prohibition against advisory opinions, standing, ripeness, mootness, and the political question doctrine.