Con Law · WikiFramers

Part One - The Structure of Government · Module 8

Limits on the Federal Judicial Power

Justiciability, taught after you know what the merits look like: advisory opinions, standing, ripeness, and mootness as the gatekeeping doctrines.

Topics

The prohibition of advisory opinions. Standing: constitutional and prudential requirements. Ripeness. Mootness.

Reading list

0 of 28 readings published · the rest are in preparation and will appear here as they are edited

  1. Note Hayburn's Case in preparation
  2. Note Plaut v. Spendthrift Farm, Inc. in preparation
  3. Note Nashville, C. & St. L. Ry. v. Wallace in preparation
  4. Opinion Allen v. Wright in preparation
  5. Opinion Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife in preparation
  6. Opinion Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency in preparation
  7. Note City of Los Angeles v. Lyons in preparation
  8. Note Clapper v. Amnesty International USA in preparation
  9. Opinion TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez in preparation
  10. Note Food and Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine in preparation
  11. Note Linda R. S. v. Richard D. in preparation
  12. Note Warth v. Seldin in preparation
  13. Note Simon v. Eastern Kentucky Welfare Rights Organization in preparation
  14. Note Duke Power Co. v. Carolina Environmental Study Group, Inc. in preparation
  15. Note Singleton v. Wulff in preparation
  16. Note Barrows v. Jackson in preparation
  17. Note Craig v. Boren in preparation
  18. Note Gilmore v. Utah in preparation
  19. Note United States v. Richardson in preparation
  20. Note Flast v. Cohen in preparation
  21. Note Poe v. Ullman in preparation
  22. Note Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner in preparation
  23. Note United Public Workers v. Mitchell in preparation
  24. Note Susan B. Anthony List v. Driehaus in preparation
  25. Note Moore v. Ogilvie in preparation
  26. Note DeFunis v. Odegaard in preparation
  27. Note Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Environmental Services in preparation
  28. Note United States Parole Commission v. Geraghty in preparation
  29. Current case California v. Trump, Nos. 26-1774 & 26-1779 (1st Cir. July 25, 2026) (state standing to challenge an executive order, and the scope of the remedy). in preparation
How to read this list

A case named without a marker is assigned as an opinion and is to be read in its entirety. Opinion (edited) means the Professor has cut it for length; the text on this site is the assigned text. Note means the case is not assigned as an opinion at all — its holding, its facts to the extent they matter, and its place in the doctrinal line are given in a note written for this course, and you are responsible for that note exactly as you are responsible for an assigned opinion. Most modules close with a Current case, a recent decision chosen because it shows the doctrine you have just read being applied at its live edge; current cases are assigned as opinions. You are responsible for all assigned required materials, including the notes, questions, problems and commentary that accompany the cases, whether or not we discuss them in class.