Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite(n): 245, Zeilen: 101-107 |
Original: Seite(n): 913, Zeilen: 24-38 |
|
---|---|---|
[Fn 710] Ebenda 217: "a textually demonstrable constitutional commitment of the issue to a coordinate political department; or a lack of judicially discoverable and manageable standards or resolving it." [Fn 711] Siehe Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486 (1969); O'Brien v. Brown, 409 U.S. 1 (1972); Gilligan v. Morgan, 413 U.S. 1 (1973). Vgl. aber auch einschränkend Uhler v. AFL-CIO, 468 U.S. 1310 (1984) und das Sondervotum von Justice Powell in Goldwater v. Carter, 444 U.S. 996, 1001 (1979). |
[...] Baker, supra, 217, identified as elements of political questions, e.g., "a textually demonstrable constitutional commitment of the issue to a coordinate political department; or a lack of judicially discoverable and manageable standards or resolving it." [...] Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486 (1969); O'Brien v. Brown, 409 U.S. 1 (1972); Gilligan v. Morgan, 413 U.S. 1 (1973). However, it could be argued that, whatever the Court may say, what it did, particularly in Powell but also in Baker, largely drains the political question doctrine of its force. See Uhler v. AFL-CIO, 468 U.S. 1310 (1984) (Justice Rehnquist on Circuit) (doubting Coleman's vitality in amendment context). But see Goldwater v. Carter, 444 U.S. 996, 1002 (1979) (opinion of Justices Rehnquist, Stewart, Stevens, and Chief Justice Burger) (relying heavily upon Coleman to find an issue of treaty termination nonjusticiable). Compare id., 1001 (Justice Powell concurring) (viewing Coleman as limited to its context). |
Fragmentsichter: Nerd_wp (Sichtungsergebnis: Gut) |
4.229
Seiten