Editing Political question (section)

{{Short description|Legal doctrine of political matters' justiciability}}
{{US fed civ pro}}
In [[United States constitutional law]], the '''political question''' [[Legal doctrine|doctrine]] holds that a constitutional dispute requiring knowledge of a non-legal character, techniques not suitable for a court, or matters explicitly assigned by the Constitution to Legislative or Executive branches lies within the political realm, rather than the judiciary. Judges customarily refuse to address such matters as a matter of [[justiciability]], questioning whether their courts are an appropriate forum for the case. Legal questions are deemed justiciable, while political questions are nonjusticiable.<ref name="HuhnWilson">Huhn, Wilson R.  ''American Constitutional Law Volume 1''. 2016.</ref> One scholar explained:

{{Blockquote|The political question doctrine holds that some questions, in their nature, are fundamentally political, and not legal, and if a question is fundamentally political ... then the court will refuse to hear that case. It will claim that it doesn't have jurisdiction. And it will leave that question to some other aspect of the political process to settle out.|John E. Finn, professor of government, 2006<ref name=tws3R18fs>{{cite news
 |author= John E. Finn
 |title= Civil Liberties and the Bill of Rights
 |work= The Teaching Company
 |quote= Part I: Lecture 4: The Court and Constitutional Interpretation (see page 55 in the guidebook)
 |year= 2016
 }}</ref>}}

A ruling of nonjusticiability prevents a case's core issue from being resolved in a court of law. When the issue involves duties not addressed by the Constitution, courts leave it to the democratic process, rather than resolving political disputes themselves.