Practice question
An executive chooses between two lawfully available programs. A suit properly alleges that the choice was made through capricious conduct amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction; government counsel answers that all program choices are political. The court ultimately finds the allegation unproved. Which distinction is correct?
- The court must invalidate the program because an allegation was filed
- The initial political label made all review constitutionally impossible
- Losing on the evidence proves there never can be judicial review
- The court may evaluate qualifying grave abuse in a proper case, yet reject the challenge on its merits without choosing its own preferred program
- The court must permanently run the program after review
Legal references
- IBP v. Zamora, G.R. No. 141284, August 15, 2000, main opinion: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/36338
- 1987 Constitution: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/3/353; Article VIII, Section 1.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.