Muskrat v. United States

Background

David Muskrat and J. Henry Dick, and William Brown and Levi B. Gritts brought separate suits on their own behalf and for other Cherokee citizens. They asked courts to declare unconstitutional several post-1902 federal laws that changed who could share in Cherokee land and money, allowed pipeline rights-of-way over allotted lands, and extended restrictions on selling allotted land. Congress passed a 1907 law authorizing these suits in the Court of Claims with appeals to this Court, and the Court of Claims had upheld the statutes and dismissed the petitions.

Reasoning

The Court examined whether Congress could give courts power to decide the validity of laws in suits that are not real disputes between adverse parties. Relying on the Constitution’s limit of judicial power to actual "cases" and "controversies," and on long-standing precedents, the Court explained that judges may decide a law’s constitutionality only when an honest, adverse conflict between parties is presented. Here, the United States was a defendant without an adverse interest and the suits were effectively attempts to get judicial opinions about legislation rather than to resolve private rights. The Court concluded Congress exceeded its constitutional authority in authorizing such proceedings.

Real world impact

The ruling requires courts to dismiss these generalized challenges and prevents Congress from creating test cases that ask for advisory judgments on federal laws. The specific suits about Cherokee allotments are sent back to be dismissed for lack of a real dispute. Questions about the statutes may still be decided later in ordinary lawsuits where there is a real, adverse conflict between parties.