Research On The Fundamentals And Factories Of The Jurisdiction Of The U.S.Supreme Court

This article states the system and practice which the U.S. Supreme Court determines the subject-working objects and their applicable standards. The U.S. Supreme Court must decide whether the lawsuit under its power be a case according with the Article?of the Constitution (hereinafter referred to Article III) before touching their substantive legal and factual issues. Only shall the U.S. Supreme Court verdict the case under the Article?which is the base of the jurisdiction of the United States Supreme Court; The base of the jurisdiction is bound to the lower federal courts and the State's court system. The jurisdiction of the United States Supreme Court is based on the Article III. What the U.S. Supreme Court classify these cases under the Article III constitutes the constitutional criteria of determining the case. What Article III implies is based on the U.S. Supreme Court's prudent standards of determining the kind of cases, which comes from its long-period judicial experience. Based on the case of the Article III, what its system, its structure, its content of each of the standards is are the issues of the article.The chapter?describes the meaning and evolution process of cases and controversies of the Article III. The first Section clarifies what the common law model is under the case of the Article III, because the judicial practice of the early Supreme Court almost aimed to all such cases. With the expansion of the federal government power, especially within the economic life of the nation powers' involvement, while the importance of social management and to expand their power, privates and non-profit organizations felt their the rights to exercise space or be squeezed, or suffered undue interference or denial, so there have been some litigation not entirely based on their private rights with damage, but for the titration and the Government's control of federal rules and acts adopted to require federal courts. What the original litigant model with damages based on private rights and established criteria for judging the case must have some changes adapted to be this kind of public law litigation as a case type.Chapter II and III discusses, the most important principle of the standing, within the standards of judging the cases. Translation it into Chinese is the innovation of this essay. Based on the U.S. judicial practice and academic research, the statement, of the Supreme Court practice, especially discussed personal injury of the key structural factor of it.The chapter?discuss causation and redress ability of standing. then the third-party standing, general grievance, the plaintiff's interests within the extent of legal protection, the standing of non-profit associations and of other organizations and of the Congress, of state governments, of federal government and its departments.Chapter?states the "ripeness" and the "mootness". The understanding of ripeness is related to the promulgation and implementation of federal law. There is need to the interpretation of the hypothetical cases to understand its meaning. Assume a pair of male and female cross-cousin brother and sister decided to get married. Assumed that the other aspects of them are in line with the "PRC Marriage Law," the requirement of marriage, but in accordance with Article VII of the Act first section, because they are genetically related collateral consanguinity within three generations, then marriage is prohibited. But they know the law by consulting the reason why genetic relationship between them as the prohibition of marriage between blood relatives, the main consideration is that the legislation worry that they will give birth to a combination of congenital disease or smart or not so healthy offspring. But they still decided to enter into marriage in order to avoid the consequences of legislative concern, they decided to do one thing, for example sterilization or contraception, from the start ,if they do such as sterilization, or committed to marriage must do so, such as contraception, it reasonably can to get married; but as long as this law still exist, according to the law they can't marry, then there will be something like this: if they comply with the law and are not to get married, which their constitutional right with each other being married is to be deprived through their law-abiding ; if they would rather brave the risk of violation of the law should be sanctioned marriage, but in order to achieve their basic constitutional rights through even breaking the law. No matter what kind of these two results are what they do not want to. So they think to make a lawsuit for Article VII on the grounds that they will have to comply with the law so that it can't tolerate significant harm. The claim is to ask the court decide which Article VII does violate the Constitution and thus it constitutes a statutory restriction, which is the ripeness principle to be solved. Understand the basic meaning of the ripeness principle and the condition of its use, The use of requirement of the constitutional review following its laws, rules, regulations and other normative legal documents of the legal system. The function of ripeness principle empowers citizens affecting them challenge in order to avoid some inadvertent result of legislation for some people or groups, which cause great losses setting aside the withdrawal or the re-starting mechanism to prevent the social resources and opportunities for personal property and waste time.Relative to the ripeness to avoid the loss of property and the parties, the mootness is the Court is to avoid waste or unnecessary consumption of resources, for the parties in court cases is to provide compensation for damages. If the action is brought against the plaintiff, the damages is there , but before the end of the lawsuit, if this damage to its cover, the court should end the process of case being heard, otherwise it can't be the case going to trial.Chapter?discusses the last two criteria of judging the cases. The first principle is to ask the court not to judge the case involved only a small part of the legal norms, most of political decision-making to resolve the political agenda, then even if it is consistent with other elements of the cases, the court should not hear them, that is, If the policy consideration is far beyond the use of legal norms, it is not a pure legal case that can be resolved through the judicial, but a need for the issue of political negotiation or compromise. It is the practice of the principle of separation of powers system of technology or micro-mechanismChapter VI is a standard system of identification of the criteria of judging cases. Most of the contents appear in front of five chapters. And Implications for China this system were discussed in brief.