A federal environmental law was passed by Congress to address pollution in interstate waterways. The law included a provision stripping federal courts of jurisdiction over any lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the law. A manufacturing company operating in several states files a lawsuit in federal court, arguing that the provision stripping jurisdiction is unconstitutional. How should the court resolve the claim?
The court cannot hear the case unless the company exhausts all administrative remedies provided by Congress in the law.
The court should refer the case to state courts, as state courts have concurrent jurisdiction over federal constitutional questions.
The court should dismiss the lawsuit because Congress can restrict federal court jurisdiction under its Article III powers.
The court should hear the lawsuit because Congress cannot bar judicial review of a constitutional challenge to its legislation.
Congress has broad authority under the Constitution to define and limit the jurisdiction of the lower federal courts, as granted under Article III, Section 1. However, Congress cannot use its jurisdictional power to strip courts of the ability to hear cases that violate fundamental constitutional rights or to prevent judicial review altogether. In this case, while Congress may restrict jurisdiction in some areas, doing so in a way that precludes any judicial review of a law's constitutionality violates the separation of powers principle, as it prevents the courts from fulfilling their essential role of checks and balances.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What does Article III of the Constitution say about judicial power?