Disappointed that both Houses of Congress are seriously debating a bill seeking to enable absolute divorce, a citizen filed a petition asking the Supreme Court to order Congressional deliberations to stop. Should the petition prosper? Explain briefly.
Suggested answer only. Not an official answer and not legal advice.
No, the petition should not prosper. Under the principle of separation of powers, courts will not interfere with Congress in the performance of its legislative functions, including deliberations on pending bills.
Unlock the full Political Law answers365 days of full access. GCash, Maya and card accepted.
This is not an official scoring system and carries no weight with the Supreme Court or any bar review provider. It measures how much of the suggested answer's wording your response covers, not whether your reasoning is correct. For practice only.
Quick check
Should a citizen's petition asking the Supreme Court to order Congress to stop deliberating on a divorce bill prosper?
The petition must be dismissed because judicial interference with pending legislative deliberations violates the separation of powers.
Under Article VIII, Section 1 of the 1987 Constitution, what is an essential prerequisite for the exercise of judicial power?
Judicial power requires an actual justiciable controversy involving legally demandable rights.
Why is a constitutional challenge against a pending legislative bill considered premature?
Challenges to pending bills are premature because no justiciable controversy exists prior to enactment into law.
What principle prevents the Supreme Court from enjoining Congressional committee hearings and floor debates?
Choices available with full access.
What is the status of a petition seeking an advisory opinion from the courts on the constitutionality of a proposed bill?
Choices available with full access.
Learn more about these topics
1. Separation Of Powers
Under the principle of separation of powers, the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial departments operate as co-equal and independent branches of government. Each department possesses exclusive authority over its constitutional sphere. Courts will not enjoin or interfere with Congress while it performs its core legislative functions, including debating, drafting, and deliberating upon proposed legislation. Enjoining legislative debates would violate the principle of non-interference among co-equal branches.
2. Justiciable Controversy Requirement
Article VIII, Section 1 of the 1987 Constitution requires an actual justiciable controversy for the exercise of judicial power. A justiciable controversy involves an active conflict of legal rights susceptible to judicial resolution. Pending legislative bills do not create a justiciable controversy because they have not been enacted into law and impose no binding legal obligations. Courts cannot issue advisory opinions on proposed legislation before its final enactment.
3. Judicial Non-Interference
The doctrine of judicial non-interference prevents courts from restraining legislative proceedings or evaluating unapproved bills. Until a bill successfully passes both Houses of Congress and becomes a law, judicial review remains premature. Citizens cannot invoke the court's jurisdiction to halt congressional committee hearings or floor debates. Any constitutional challenge against legislative action can only be raised after the law takes effect.