🇺🇸
Constitutional Law • Justiciability Doctrines
CONLAW#001
Legal Definition
No. A federal court may not issue advisory opinions. For a court to exercise jurisdiction, there must be a specific present harm or threat of specific present harm and the decision must resolve the underlying dispute.
Plain English Explanation
A federal court is a special kind of court that deals with issues that involve the federal government. But, federal courts can't give advice about things that might happen in the future. They can only make decisions about things that are happening right now.
For a court to have the power to make a decision, there must be a real problem that needs to be solved. This problem must be something that is hurting someone or might hurt someone soon. And the court's decision must be able to fix the problem.
In simple terms, a federal court can only make a decision if there is a current problem and the decision will fix it.
The court will not determine the constitutionality of a statute that has never been enforced.
For a court to have the power to make a decision, there must be a real problem that needs to be solved. This problem must be something that is hurting someone or might hurt someone soon. And the court's decision must be able to fix the problem.
In simple terms, a federal court can only make a decision if there is a current problem and the decision will fix it.
The court will not determine the constitutionality of a statute that has never been enforced.
Hypothetical
Hypo 1: Bob is worried that the government is going to take away his land to build a new park. Bob wants to know if the government is allowed to do this and if he should be worried about it. He asks the court for an opinion about it. Result: In this scenario, the court would not be able to give Bob an advisory opinion, because there is no specific present harm or threat of harm. The harm that Bob is worried about is something that might happen in the future, and the court can only make decisions about things that are happening now. In contrast, let's say that the government did take away Bob's land, and Bob wants to sue the government. He would be able to do so because now there is a specific present harm and the court can resolve the underlying dispute by determining if the government had the right to take his land.
Visual Aids
