A neighbor seeks an injunction to prevent a power plant from emitting smoke. The power plant later goes bankrupt and shuts down.

Jimmy often steals Johnny's lunch. When Jimmy steals Johnny's next lunch, Johnny files suit. Jimmy quickly returns the lunch.

A man seeks an injunction for the government to open the swimming pool in the spring. By the time the case is heard, it's already winter again.

A woman is worries that her boss will fire her. She files a suit seeking an injunction to prevent the firing. The boss never fires her.

Whether Georgia could sue a citizen of another state in state court.

Whether a citizen of another state could sue Georgia in federal court.

Whether Georgia could sue a citizen of another state in federal court.

Whether a citizen of another state could sue Georgia in state court.

The "case or controversy" requirement.

The jurisdictional provisions (like the diversity jurisdiction rules).

The Jury Clause.

The Due Process Clause.

Only Congress, not the president, may seize private assets.

The president may seize private assets, but only based on a valid law.

The President may seize private assets, but only when war is formally declared.

Chisholm

The United States

Georgia

Whether a Senate vote on a politically contentious issue complies with the Senate's own rules.

Whether -- for the purposes of non-delegation doctrine -- a law regulation political issues (e.g., elections) articulates an "intelligible principle."

Whether the political conditions in a foreign country justify a President's formal recognition of that country.

Truman's decision to inform allowed him to win.

Truman's failure to inform undercut his case.

Truman's decision to inform didn't matter.

Truman's failure to inform didn't matter.

(B) No, because the Court cannot “redress” Dog’s death in the way requested.

Yes.

(A) No, because the Defendant did not “cause” Dog’s death.

No,becauseAandB.

Yes as to the damages claim, but no as to the claim for injunctive relief.

No, because the Defendant did not “cause” Dog’s death.

Yes as to both claims.

Congress had not even considered legislation on the issue of labor-related seizures.

Congress was actively considering legislation on the issue of labor-related seizures.

Congress had already legislated on the issue of labor disputes and rejected this type of seizure.

Practice

Policy

Precedent

Historical context

No, the Plaintiff lacks standing because federal law does not allow him to file an amended tax return more than a year after the original return filing, and therefore the Court cannot “redress” his injury.

Yes, the Plaintiff has standing because he suffered an “injury in fact,” there is “causation,” and there is “redressability.”

No, the Plaintiff lacks standing because he has not suffered an “injury in fact.”

No, the Plaintiff lacks standing because he caused his own injury.

The President acted lawfully, because order is only temporary.

The employees lack standing.

The President acted unlawfully, because the statute bars compelled acts.

The case raises a political question.

No,the Plaintiff lacks standing because he caused his own injury.

No, the Plaintiff lacks standing because federal law does not allow the judge to order any relief in this case.

Yes, the Plaintiff has standing because he suffered an “injury in fact,” there is “causation,” and there is “redressability.”

No, the Plaintiff lacks standing because he has not suffered an “injury in fact.”

No, because Congress has given itself a role in the execution of the law.

Yes, because Congress may limit executive power unless the Constitution grants sole authority to the Executive Branch.

Yes, because the Congress, pursuant to the Naturalization Clause, may decide who may be lawfully admitted to or deported from the United States.

No, because the law lacks an intelligible principle.