About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

1 1 (June 14, 2022)

handle is hein.crs/govegih0001 and id is 1 raw text is: Congressional ______ '.Research Service The Political Question Doctrine: Congressional Governance and Impeachment as Political Questions (Part 5) June 14, 2022 This Legal Sidebar is the fifth in a six-part series that discusses the Supreme Court's political question doctrine, which instructs that federal courts should forbear from resolving questions when doing so would require the judiciary to make policy decisions, exercise discretion beyond its competency, or encroach on powers the Constitution vests in the legislative or executive branches. By limiting the range of cases federal courts can consider, the political question doctrine is intended to maintain the separation of powers and recognize the roles of the legislative and executive branches in interpreting the Constitution. Understanding the political question doctrine may assist Members of Congress in recognizing when actions of Congress or the executive branch would not be subject to judicial review. For additional background on this topic and citations to relevant sources, please see the Constitution of the United States, Analysis and Interpretation. The Supreme Court has applied the political question doctrine to cases involving the internal governance of Congress, though recent decisions have construed the doctrine narrowly in this context. In the pre- Baker case Marshall Field & Co. v Clark, plaintiffs challenging a tariff law contended that the law was invalid because a section of the bill passed by Congress was omitted from the final version of the law signed by the President. The Court concluded that it could not adjudicate this issue. Because of the respect due to a co-ordinate branch of the government, the Court had to take as conclusive the fact that the act was attested by the signatures of the presiding officers of the houses of Congress and approved by the President. Baker explained that Clark signified the need for respect to coequal branches and for finality and certainty about statutes. A few cases since Baker have added color to the concept of respect in this context. For example, in Powell v. McCormack, an individual elected to the House of Representatives challenged a House resolution excluding him from his seat in Congress. Although the Member-elect met the age and citizenship requirements in Article I, Section 2, the House found that he had misrepresented travel expenses and made illegal salary payments to his wife. The defendants-Members and officers of the House-argued that the text of the Constitution, specifically Article I, Section 5, gave Congress exclusive authority to judge the qualifications of its own Members, so Congress could determine that the Member Congressional Research Service https://crsreports. congress.gov LSB10760 CRS Legal Sidebar Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most