A state legislature, citing national security concerns, passed a law mandating that certain industries remain under state control. Several private corporations have challenged this law as violating federal commerce regulations. The state argues that judicial review of the law is precluded because the issue involves national security, which is a matter for the political branches. How should the court address this argument?
The court should review the case because the issue does not fall under a question reserved for political branches.
The court should require private corporations to pursue administrative remedies before seeking judicial review.
The court should direct Congress to address the matter, as conflicts involving interstate commerce are generally within its jurisdiction.
The court should decline to hear the case because national security concerns are generally addressed by the legislature and executive branches.
The correct answer requires understanding the political question doctrine, which applies when the Constitution commits decision-making on an issue to another branch or when courts lack manageable standards to resolve the matter. Here, the issue involves a conflict between state law and federal commerce regulations, which courts are equipped to adjudicate. Invoking 'national security' alone does not render the issue a political question unless the case hinges on non-justiciable matters like foreign policy or war powers. The other answers are flawed because they either misstate the judiciary's role, defer improperly to other branches, or misunderstand procedural requirements.
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 is the political question doctrine?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
How do federal commerce regulations interact with state laws?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What are judicial remedies that private corporations might seek?