Practice question
An association asks the Court to invalidate a law but identifies no member subject to it, no threatened enforcement against itself or its members, and no concrete effect on an enforceable right. Its only allegation is that its members dislike the policy. Assume no recognized exception to standing or actual controversy is invoked or established. Which is best?
- The phrase unconstitutional conclusively supplies every requisite
- Dislike of policy automatically establishes direct injury
- The stated facts do not establish the ordinary standing and actual-controversy requirements
- An association is categorically barred from every constitutional case
- Popularity of the challenge cures every missing fact
Legal references
- 1987 Constitution, Article VIII, Section 1: https://lawphil.net/consti/cons1987.html
- Francisco v. House of Representatives, G.R. No. 160261 and consolidated cases, November 10, 2003, main opinion, Essential Requisites for Judicial Review: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2003/nov2003/gr_160261_2003.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.