This is an extract of our High Level document, which we sell as part of our Federal Courts Outlines collection written by the top tier of University Of Virginia students.
The following is a more accessble plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our Federal Courts Outlines. Due to the challenges of extracting text from PDFs, it will have odd formatting:
Federal Courts High Level Overview Fall 2015 Themes
? Public v. Private Rights o A3 Standing, Qui Tam
? Gov't Standing o Trapper Hypo/Bindingness Problem: if we give standing to everyone . . . thousands of suits?
o Political questions: political branches' decisions must implicate a public right in order for it to be possibly binding on the courts. o Non-A3 Courts: cannot adjudicate purely private rights (only privileges and public rights)
? Rights vs. Privileges o Finality: is it a vested right yet?
o Privileges: Was this "right" created by government or natural law?
? Do you have to wait for a criminal proceeding to raise a constitutional argument?
o Craig v. Boren (3rd party standing, beer vendor sues so 18-year-old doesn't have to get arrested) o Steffel (allowed to seek injunction against enforcement of trespassing law so he doesn't have to get arrested for trespassing, suit was ripe and not subject to Younger Doctrine)
? When do courts wait to resolve an issue?
o Ripeness o Waiting for highest state court/exhaust state court procedure
? Writ of Habeas Corupus
? 1257 Appeals from State Courts to SCOTUS o Someone else should decide it
? Political Question Doctrine (these are FINAL)
? Pullman Abstention
? Younger Doctrine
? Burford Abstention
? When should federal court use someone else's resolution of an issue instead of doing it on their own?
o Political Questions: use the political branches' determinations (these are FINAL) o Erie Doctrine: for matters of unwritten state law and interpretation of state statutes, use the state's highest court (unless you expect them to rule differently on the issue next time it comes up) o Pullman Abstention: if case involving conlaw could be resolved on a distinct, unsettled state question, let the state answer the question first o Younger Doctrine: let the state criminal court hear the argument instead of issuing injunction
? Congressional Regulation of what state courts can hear o Exclusive Federal Jurisdiction (Jurisdiction-Stripping Statutes) o Removal Jurisdiction
? Why State Procedure Matters o Adequate and Independent State Law Grounds (Procedural Forfeiture) o Habeas and Procedural Default
? Federal Common Law: when? how? from where? why?
? Substance vs. Procedure o Erie/Hanna (when state vs. federal rules apply)
? When you imply something o FCL o Preemption o COA
? Purposivism (Warren Court) to Textualism (Rehnquist/Roberts courts) o Implied Causes of Action (Bivens and statutory) o Habeas Corpus
? Appellate Function of District Courts o Review of findings of non-A3 !Courts
Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our Federal Courts Outlines.