Which of the following cases is most likely to be considered a political question and nonjudiciable? Representatives
A. Gerrymandering
B. A congressional decision that an amendment has been ratified
C. A congressional decision to not seat an elected member of the House of
D. A case involving a congressional subpoena of presidential records
is it A
I disagree. Under the voting rights act of 1965 gerrymandering for racial reasons is prohibited and subject to judicial action. A decision in Congress that an amendment to a bill has been ratified, or an amendment to the constitution, is a matter of doing the math according to procedure and usually not subject to challenge in the courts.
Yes, option A (Gerrymandering) is most likely to be considered a political question and nonjudiciable. Now, let me explain how to get to this answer.
To determine whether a case is political and nonjudiciable, we need to understand the concept of political questions and the scope of judicial review.
Political questions are those issues that are deemed to be better addressed by the political branches of government (such as the executive or legislative) rather than being resolved by the courts. These questions typically involve matters of policy, politics, or the Constitution's allocation of powers among different branches.
On the other hand, judicial review is the power of the courts to review the constitutionality of actions taken by the other branches of government. However, the courts are often cautious about intervening in political questions because they believe that resolving these issues is the responsibility of the political branches.
Now, looking at the options:
A. Gerrymandering refers to the practice of manipulating the boundaries of an electoral district to give an unfair advantage to a particular political party or group. This practice is highly political in nature and involves decisions about how voting districts are drawn, which is traditionally a responsibility of the legislative branch. The courts are reluctant to intervene in such cases as they often consider it a political question.
B. A congressional decision that an amendment has been ratified involves a constitutional matter that can be reviewed by the courts. It is not typically considered a political question, as the courts have the ability to interpret and apply the Constitution.
C. A congressional decision to not seat an elected member of the House of Representatives can involve political considerations, but it is also subject to legal review by the courts. In similar cases, the courts have intervened to ensure the proper application of constitutional provisions and rules.
D. A case involving a congressional subpoena of presidential records is a legal matter that can be subjected to judicial review. The courts have to assess the legality of such actions under the Constitution and may evaluate questions of executive privilege, separation of powers, or other legal considerations.
Considering the definitions of political questions and the scope of judicial review, option A (Gerrymandering) is most likely to be considered a political question and nonjudiciable.