Re: Constitutional Challenge to (C) Code

On 1 Apr 1998, Denis Borges Barbosa <denisbarbosa[_at_]bbs.unikey.com.br> wrote:
>
> I know that this theme is more adequate to a Constitutional Law list
> than this one, but I wonder why you must have a case and controversy
> to discuss constitutionality issues.

It's not just for constitutional issues. It's a requirement for federal subject matter jurisdiction in any federal case, constitutional or not.

It comes from the language in Article III, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, which outlines the jurisdiction of the federal courts and limits it to cases and controversies.

The idea is that you don't want the courts to issue advisory opinions on the law. You only want them issuing opinions when there is a real case with real parties advocating their real positions. That's the essence of what the judicial power is. An advisory opinion is essentially legislation.

--
Terry Carroll       |  "I know the Great Lakes.  I've traveled the 
Santa Clara, CA     |  Great Lakes.  And Lake Champlain is not one of
carroll[_at_]tjc.com     |  the Great Lakes." - U.S. Senator John Glenn reacts
Modell delendus est |  to 33 U.S.C. 1122 as amended by Pub.L. 105-160