Which of the following would the supreme court likely refuse to hear because of \mootness\?

Recommended textbook solutions

Which of the following would the supreme court likely refuse to hear because of mootness?

American Government

1st EditionGlen Krutz

412 solutions

Which of the following would the supreme court likely refuse to hear because of mootness?

Magruder's American Government (Florida Student Edition)

1st EditionDaniel M. Shea

602 solutions

Which of the following would the supreme court likely refuse to hear because of mootness?

United States Government: Our Democracy

1st EditionDonald A. Ritchie, Richard C. Remy

1,148 solutions

Which of the following would the supreme court likely refuse to hear because of mootness?

Government in America: Elections and Updates Edition

16th EditionGeorge C. Edwards III, Martin P. Wattenberg, Robert L. Lineberry

269 solutions

What are some of the reasons the Supreme Court may refuse to hear a case?

The Court will often deny review when the circuit split is new, or involves only a few circuits, or involves an issue that may be resolved by Congress through new legislation or a federal agency through revised regulations.

Why is mootness a disqualifying factor in a case coming before the Supreme Court?

That consequence is because a moot case does not qualify as a "case or controversy" under Article III; due to the lack of jurisdiction, federal courts have no power to consider the merits of a constitutionally moot case.

What is mootness in the Supreme Court?

Because Federal Courts only have constitutional authority to resolve actual disputes (see Case or Controversy) legal actions cannot be brought or continued after the matter at issue has been resolved, leaving no live dispute for a court to resolve. In such a case, the matter is said to be "moot".

Why would the Supreme Court refuse to hear an appeal?

The Supreme Court, however, does not have to grant review. The Court typically will agree to hear a case only when it involves an unusually important legal principle, or when two or more federal appellate courts have interpreted a law differently.