diff options
| author | Holden Rohrer <hr@hrhr.dev> | 2020-10-18 17:30:46 -0400 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Holden Rohrer <hr@hrhr.dev> | 2020-10-18 17:30:46 -0400 |
| commit | 632638431273901dfd25ce65d5ebbd6294575a80 (patch) | |
| tree | 1cb2d712efcdfab97054586d6b8f39f80eb0ee78 | |
| parent | 5a4f83855751705eefe1cfc8053acc38d47ec12e (diff) | |
did the 10/19 question for INTA
| -rw-r--r-- | rich/26_question | 12 |
1 files changed, 12 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/rich/26_question b/rich/26_question new file mode 100644 index 0000000..61a87fd --- /dev/null +++ b/rich/26_question @@ -0,0 +1,12 @@ +Which of the 7 criteria for Case Selection presented in the lecture +should guarantee access to the Supreme Court and why? No more than 2--3 +sentences. + +Two cases should guarantee access to the Supreme Court: a state Supreme +Court invalidating a federal law and the Solicitor General requesting +review. A state Supreme Court's invalidation should be handled +immediately in order to avoid precedents that vary the rights of +citizens of different states. The Solicitor General's request is a less +pressing motivation, but so as to avoid extreme political bias in the +Court's docket, the executive should be able to exert this power on the +Court, forcing it to at least take a stance on certain issues. |