Goldwater v Carter Brief Fact Summary. President Carter terminated a treaty with Taiwan without congressional approval. Synopsis of Rule of Law. This is a political question and not justiciable. Facts. President Carter terminated a treaty with Taiwan, and a few Congressional members felt that this deprived them of their Constitutional function. However, no Congressional action was ever taken. The Senate considered a resolution that would require the President to get Senate approval before any mutual defense treaty could be terminated, but there was no final vote on the resolution. Issue. Is this issue of whether a President can terminate a treaty without Congressional approval a non-justiciable political question? Held. Yes. Whether or not a President can terminate a treaty closely involves his foreing relations authority and therefore is not reviewable by the Supreme Court. Dissent. Even though the Court cannot review political questions, the court has the power to review whether or not a particular branch of government has exclusive decision-making power over an issue. Concurrence. This issue was not ripe because the Senate never tried to invoke a resolution against it. Were it ripe, however, the issue would be justiciable because it would require an interpretation of the Constitution. Even though the Supreme Court cannot hear purely political questions, it can review cases to determine if the interpretation of the Constitution is correct. Discussion. In the arena of foreign affairs, the Court has held issues to be political questions even though many Justices believe these issues relate to the interpretation of the Constitution, and are therefore reviewable. The Court places a great emphasis on establishing a single, unified voice for the nation on foreign affairs is

Goldwater v Carter

Download DOCX Report

Upload
ricky-james-laggui-suyu
View
212
Download
0

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Mariano v COMELECG.R. No. 118577 March 7, 1995, 242 SCRA 211FACTS:This is a petition for prohibition and declaratory relief filed by petitioners Juanito Mariano, Jr., Ligaya S. Bautista, Teresita Tibay, Camilo Santos, Frankie Cruz, Ricardo Pascual, Teresita Abang, Valentina Pitalvero, Rufino Caldoza, Florante Alba, and Perfecto Alba. Of the petitioners, only Mariano, Jr., is a resident of Makati. The others are residents of Ibayo Ususan, Taguig, Metro Manila. Suing as taxpayers, they assail sections 2, 51, and 52 of Republic Act No. 7854 as unconstitutional.ISSUE:Whether or not there is an actual case or controversy to challenge the constitutionality of one of the questioned sections of R.A. No. 7854.HELD:The requirements before a litigant can challenge the constitutionality of a law are well delineated. They are: 1) there must be an actual case or controversy; (2) the question of constitutionality must be raised by the proper party; (3) the constitutional question must be raised at the earliest possible opportunity; and (4) the decision on the constitutional question must be necessary to the determination of the case itself. Petitioners have far from complied with these requirements. The petition is premised on the occurrence of many contingent events, i.e., that Mayor Binay will run again in this coming mayoralty elections; that he would be re-elected in said elections; and that he would seek re-election for the same position in the 1998 elections. Considering that these contingencies may or may not happen, petitioners merely pose a hypothetical issue which has yet to ripen to an actual case or controversy. Petitioners who are residents of Taguig (except Mariano) are not also the proper partiesto raise this abstract issue. Worse, they hoist this futuristic issue in a petition for declaratory relief over which this Court has no jurisdiction.

Citation preview

Goldwater v Carter

Brief Fact Summary.President Carter terminated a treaty with Taiwan without congressional approval.Synopsis of Rule of Law.This is a political question and not justiciable.

Facts.President Carter terminated a treaty with Taiwan, and a few Congressional members felt that this deprived them of their Constitutional function. However, no Congressional action was ever taken. The Senate considered a resolution that would require the President to get Senate approval before any mutual defense treaty could be terminated, but there was no final vote on the resolution.Issue.Is this issue of whether a President can terminate a treaty without Congressional approval a non-justiciable political question?

Held.Yes. Whether or not a President can terminate a treaty closely involves his foreing relations authority and therefore is not reviewable by the Supreme Court.Dissent.Even though the Court cannot review political questions, the court has the power to review whether or not a particular branch of government has exclusive decision-making power over an issue.Concurrence. This issue was not ripe because the Senate never tried to invoke a resolution against it. Were it ripe, however, the issue would be justiciable because it would require an interpretation of the Constitution. Even though the Supreme Court cannot hear purely political questions, it can review cases to determine if the interpretation of the Constitution is correct.

Discussion.In the arena of foreign affairs, the Court has held issues to be political questions even though many Justices believe these issues relate to the interpretation of the Constitution, and are therefore reviewable. The Court places a great emphasis on establishing a single, unified voice for the nation on foreign affairs is