Consider the following questions in connection with the view of Justice Brandeis in Ashwander v. TVA:

1. Under what circumstances has the Supreme Court asserted that, despite jurisdiction, a court should decline to reach the merits of a constitutional issue?

2. Do the principles articulated by Justice Brandeis serve to improve the development of constitutional law in our case law system? Or do one or more of these principles hinder the development of doctrine?

3. Justice Brandeis asserted that it is inappropriate for a court "to decide questions of a constitutional nature unless absolutely necessary to a decision of the case." In Marbury, was it "absolutely necessary" to determine at what point in the appointment process a right to office vests as a matter of constitutional law? Was it "absolutely necessary" to determine whether a writ of mandamus could constitutionally issue to the Secretary of State?

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

1 The circumstances under which the Supreme Court has asserted that a court should decline to reach the merits of a constitutional issue include Lack ... View the full answer