political question doctrine in Kentucky

2023III, §2. 41 Sexton, 566 S.W.3d at 193 . 42 Id. 43 Warth, 422 U.S. at 498–99 (internal citations omitted). 15 standing, acting on their own motion, to ensure that only justiciable causes proceed in court[.]”44 In Sexton, this Court held that Section 112(5) of the Kentucky Constitution which vests “original jurisdiction of all justiciable causes not vested in some other court” in Kentucky’s circuit courts was a sufficient parallel to the “cases and controversies” language of the U.S. Constitution to adopt the federal constitutional standing doctrine espoused in Lujan.45 Consequently, unless stan

2018“In essence the question of standing is whether the litigant is entitled to have the court decide the merits of the dispute or of particular issues.”24 Federal constitutional standing has three requirements: the plaintiff must allege that 1) he or she has suffered or imminently will suffer an injury; 2) the injury is fairly traceable to the defendant’s conduct; and 3) a favorable federal court decision is likely to redress the injury.25 In addition to these federal constitutional requirements, two major federal prudential standing principles exist: (1) a party generally may assert only his or

2026The political question doctrine, which is primarily grounded in the separation of powers doctrine, states that “the judicial department should not interfere in the exercise by another department of a discretion that is committed by a textually demonstrable provision of the Constitution to the other department, or seek to resolve an issue for which it lacks judicially discoverable and manageable standards[.]” Fletcher v. Commonwealth, 163 S.W.3d 852, 860 (Ky. 2005) (citing Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 210 (1962); Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486, 518 (1969); Vieth v. Jubelirer, 541 U.S. 267, 2

2026The political question doctrine, which is primarily grounded in the separation of powers doctrine, states that “the judicial department should not interfere in the exercise by another department of a discretion that is committed by a textually demonstrable provision of the Constitution to the other department, or seek to resolve an issue for which it lacks judicially discoverable and manageable standards[.]” Fletcher v. Commonwealth, 163 S.W.3d 852, 860 (Ky. 2005) (citing Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 210 (1962); Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486, 518 (1969); Vieth v. Jubelirer, 541 U.S. 267, 2

2026The political question doctrine, which is primarily grounded in the separation of powers doctrine, states that “the judicial department should not interfere in the exercise by another department of a discretion that is committed by a textually demonstrable provision of the Constitution to the other department, or seek to resolve an issue for which it lacks judicially discoverable and manageable standards[.]” Fletcher v. Commonwealth, 163 S.W.3d 852, 860 (Ky. 2005) (citing Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 210 (1962); Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486, 518 (1969); Vieth v. Jubelirer, 541 U.S. 267, 2

2026The political question doctrine, which is primarily grounded in the separation of powers doctrine, states that “the judicial department should not interfere in the exercise by another department of a discretion that is committed by a textually demonstrable provision of the Constitution to the other department, or seek to resolve an issue for which it lacks judicially discoverable and manageable standards[.]” Fletcher v. Commonwealth, 163 S.W.3d 852, 860 (Ky. 2005) (citing Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 210 (1962); Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486, 518 (1969); Vieth v. Jubelirer, 541 U.S. 267, 2

2023See DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. Cuno, 547 U.S. 332 , 352–53 (2006).

2023Beshear, 563 S.W.3d 74, 81 (Ky. 2018) (citation omitted).

2023The U.S. Supreme Court has accordingly interpreted the U.S. Constitution as providing a “series of limits on the federal judicial power.”39 One such limit is Article III of the U.S. Constitution’s directive that federal courts may only consider “cases and controversies.”40 The U.S. Supreme Court has identified five major justiciability doctrines to ensure that only cases and controversies are considered by the federal judiciary.41 Those doctrines are: the prohibition against rendering advisory opinions, ripeness, mootness, the political question doctrine, and—most significant for our purposes—

2023III, §2. 41 Sexton, 566 S.W.3d at 193 . 42 Id. 43 Warth, 422 U.S. at 498–99 (internal citations omitted). 15 standing, acting on their own motion, to ensure that only justiciable causes proceed in court[.]”44 In Sexton, this Court held that Section 112(5) of the Kentucky Constitution which vests “original jurisdiction of all justiciable causes not vested in some other court” in Kentucky’s circuit courts was a sufficient parallel to the “cases and controversies” language of the U.S. Constitution to adopt the federal constitutional standing doctrine espoused in Lujan.45 Consequently, unless stan

2023Moreover, the scope of judicial review in these decisions is fundamentally limited to compliance with 50 the requirements of Sections 6 and 33 of the Kentucky Constitution. 9 Given this backdrop coupled with the lack of coherent, judicially manageable standards for the resolution of partisan gerrymandering claims beyond the explicit mandates of Sections 6 and 33, I view the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Rucho v. Common Cause, 139 S.Ct. 2484 (2019), as highly persuasive and would adopt its analysis on the political question doctrine.

2023In Rucho, the Supreme Court explained that when a “question is entrusted to one of the political branches or involves no judicially enforceable rights[,]” “the claim is said to present a ‘political question’ and to be nonjusticiable—outside the courts’ competence and therefore beyond the courts’ jurisdiction.” Id. at 2494 (citations omitted).

2023Miller, 18 S.W. at 524 (“If, through error of opinion, the convention exceeded its power, and the people are dissatisfied, they have ample remedy, without the judiciary being asked to over-step the proper limits of its power.