Penn Undergraduate Law Journal
  • Home
  • About
    • Mission
    • Masthead
    • Faculty Advisory Board
    • Partner Journals
    • Sponsors
  • Submissions
  • Full Issues
  • The Roundtable
  • Events
  • Contact
    • Contact
    • Applications
    • FAQs
  • Home
  • About
    • Mission
    • Masthead
    • Faculty Advisory Board
    • Partner Journals
    • Sponsors
  • Submissions
  • Full Issues
  • The Roundtable
  • Events
  • Contact
    • Contact
    • Applications
    • FAQs

The Roundtable


Welcome to the Roundtable, a forum for incisive commentary and analysis
on cases and developments in law and the legal system.


INTERESTED IN wRITING FOR tHE rOUNDTABLE?

Justiciability and the Public’s Dependence on the Courts in Trump Era

4/4/2019

0 Comments

 
Picture
By Cole Borlee
Cole Borlee is a freshman in the College of Arts and Sciences ​

 
​
One of the most notable examples of President Trump being sued is the travel ban that was first put into place in early 2017. The lawsuits poured in immediately following the executive order that instituted the travel ban. And while injunctions were granted right away, there existed a serious question among experts on whether the courts could even consider arguments against the order. This is called justiciability; that is, the ability of a court to actually hear and consider a case [1; 2].
 The typical criteria for a matter to be justiciable are fairly straightforward. The plaintiff must have standing, which is to say that they must have been harmed by the defendant, and this harm must be something such that the court can remedy. The matter must be ripe but not moot; that is, the case must present an actual controversy, but not have already been resolved. And finally, the matter cannot be a political question, or be an especially politically charged issue [3].
 
In the case of the travel ban, the first question presented to the Supreme Court for their decision was whether the challenges against the power of the President to issue the proclamation were even justiciable. The majority opinion, which was decided for Trump, assumed that these challenges were justiciable and moved right over to the other questions of the case. However, consideration of the justiciability of the case is very important, and can offer insights into the shift of the power of the court in recent decades [4].


Over the past 50 years, the scope of power that the court has jurisdiction over has increased. The most prominent example of this is their consideration of what is a “political question” in terms of justiciability. Oetjen v. Central Leather Co. (1918) can be used to set a baseline for the extent of the court’s power. The court in this case ruled that the way the executive branch uses its powers is a political question, and therefore not able to be reviewed by the court [3]. The limits on the power of the court through justiciability were increased in 1962 with Baker v. Carr, in which it was decided that matters that are explicitly given to the responsibility of the other two branches by the constitution are political questions, and therefore not justiciable [5].

​The concept of justiciability is one of the most important ones for the judicial powers. The necessity of “standing” on the part of the plaintiff prevents frivolous, unnecessary, or otherwise inappropriate lawsuits from flooding the courts. In addition, the “political question” aspect is an important one for limiting the powers of the judicial; the alternative, in which the Supreme Court is able to rule on cases that have no constitutional controversy, is one in which the justices have to decide on political questions with their personal political beliefs. Given that the judicial is supposed to be the apolitical branch of the government that exists to keep the government true to the constitution, this alternative would be a breach of this purpose. Indeed, this is a slippery slope, upon which the third branch would become as polarized as the other two [6].

Knowing how important the correct use of justiciability is, it can be frightening to see how it has quickly been slipping away from the minds of the justices in the past handful of years. Again, returning to our principal example, the travel ban was brought up in court on the basis of religious discrimination, which is unconstitutional. Though the first two “drafts” of the travel were certain to be struck down, the third issuance (Proclamation 9645) was “watered down” enough to be considered what Trump was calling it: “national security”, and not the noted religious discrimination [1]. National security is power that is explicitly given to the President (and debatably, Congress) and as such, it constitutes a political question by the decision reached in Baker v. Carr [7]. Therefore, it should not have been justiciable. The fact the court simply assumed justiciability on a political question is a worrying one, and goes to shown the role of the courts in the high contentious presidency that America is experiencing now.


It has been noticed by experts and scholars alike that the court has been drifting away from consideration of legal questions towards the political. This has certainly been jumpstarted by the Trump presidency, which has seen one of the highest rate of lawsuits against a sitting president in the modern era [8]. Since many democrats disagree with Trump on his political issues, and they are not able to see their desired results in the Republican-controlled Congress before the midterms, many democrats see lawsuits and the judicial branch as their only way of fighting back. This is why there have been so many injunctions and federal lawsuits in the past two years.

However, asking the courts to settle these political questions sets a dangerous precedent that can only lead to a degeneration of the purpose of the judicial branch. The only route to pursue a political disagreement is through the executive or the legislative. Instead of asking the courts to strike down government actions that they disagree with on a political level, people should find other ways; protests, boycotts, and voting can all be methods of applying political pressure that are better and more appropriate than these kinds of lawsuits.

[1] “Timeline of the Muslim Ban.” ACLU of Washington, 26 Nov. 2018.
[2] Miller, Mark. “Focus on Legal Questions, Not Politics, in Supreme Court Travel Ban Case.” TheHill, The Hill, 23 Apr. 2018.
[3] Strasser, Mr. Ryan. “Justiciability.” LII / Legal Information Institute, Legal Information Institute, 7 Nov. 2018.
[4] Trump v. Hawaii, 585 U. S. ___ (2018)
[5] "Baker v. Carr." Oyez, 29 Nov. 2018
[6] Hashmall, Mr. Joe. “Political Question Doctrine.” LII / Legal Information Institute, Legal Information Institute, 4 July 2017.
[7] III, Edwin Meese. “Who Is Responsible for America's Security?” The Heritage Foundation, 11 Aug. 2011.
[8] Penzenstadler, Nick, and Susan Page. “Exclusive: Trump's 3,500 Lawsuits Unprecedented for a Presidential Nominee.” USA Today, Gannett Satellite Information Network, 23 Oct. 2017.
​

​The opinions and views expressed through this publication are the opinions of the designated authors and do not reflect the opinions or views of the Penn Undergraduate Law Journal, our staff, or our clients.
0 Comments

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.

    Categories

    All
    Akshita Tiwary
    Alana Mattei
    Albert Manfredi
    Alexander Saeedy
    Alexandra Aaron
    Alice Giannini
    Alicia Kysar
    Ally Margolis
    Alya Abbassian
    Anika Prakash
    Anna Schwartz
    Ashley Kim
    Astha Pandey
    Benjamin Ng'aru
    Brónach Rafferty
    Bryce Klehm
    Cary Holley
    Christina Gunzenhauser
    Christine Mitchell
    Christopher Brown
    Clarissa Alvarez
    Cole Borlee
    Connor Gallagher
    Dan Spinelli
    Dan Zhang
    Davis Berlind
    Derek Willie
    Edgar Palomino
    Edna Simbi
    Emma Davies
    Esther Lee
    Evelyn Bond
    Filzah Belal
    Frank Geng
    Gabriel Maliha
    Georgia Ray
    Graham Reynolds
    Habib Olapade
    Hailie Goldsmith
    Harshit Rai
    Henry Lininger
    Hetal Doshi
    Iris Zhang
    Irtaza Ali
    Isabela Baghdady
    Ishita Chakrabarty
    Jessica "Lulu" Lipman
    Jonathan Lahdo
    Jonathan Stahl
    Joseph Squillaro
    Justin Yang
    Kaitlyn Rentala
    Katie Kaufman
    Kelly Liang
    Keshav Sharma
    Ketaki Gujar
    Lauren Pak
    Lavi Ben Dor
    Libby Rozbruch
    Lindsey Li
    Luis Bravo
    Lyndsey Reeve
    Madeline Decker
    Maja Cvjetanovic
    Maliha Farrooz
    Marco DiLeonardo
    Margaret Lu
    Matthew Caulfield
    Michael Keshmiri
    Mina Nur Basmaci
    Muskan Mumtaz
    Natalie Peelish
    Natasha Darlington
    Natasha Kang
    Nayeon Kim
    Nicholas Parsons
    Nicholas Williams
    Nicole Greenstein
    Nihal Sahu
    Omar Khoury
    Owen Voutsinas Klose
    Owen Voutsinas-Klose
    Pheby Liu
    Rachel Gu
    Rachel Pomerantz
    Rebecca Heilweil
    Regina Salmons
    Sam Nadler
    Sandeep Suresh
    Sanjay Dureseti
    Sarah Simon
    Saranya Das Sharma
    Saranya Sharma
    Sasha Bryski
    Saxon Bryant
    Sean Foley
    Sebastian Bates
    Shannon Alvino
    Shiven Sharma
    Siddarth Sethi
    Sneha Sharma
    Sophie Lovering
    Steven Jacobson
    Suaida Firoze
    Suprateek Neogi
    Takane Shoji
    Tanner Bowen
    Taryn MacKinney
    Thomas Cribbins
    Todd Costa
    Tyler Larkworthy
    Vatsal Patel
    Vikram Balasubramanian
    Wajeeha Ahmad
    Yeonhwa Lee

    Archives

    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    November 2014
    October 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013

Picture
Picture
​