The Essence of Procedural Due Process
Procedural due process describes the constitutional requirement that when in case the federal government conducts itself in such a way that a citizen is denied a liberty, life or property interest, the individual must be availed with a notice, and granted an opportunity to be heard as well as a decision by a decision maker who is neutral. Together with a substantive due process, they make the two components of due process. In the US constitution, the Fifth and the Fourteenth amendments provide that state and federal governments shall not deprive any individual of liberty, life or property in the absence of due process of the law (Gross, 2015). Laws that impair the liberty or property interests of people in the absence of a sufficient justification or reason violate the substantive due process rights. This means that the essence of the procedural due process is to ensure that laws are enforced through a fair process that does not impair the liberty or property interests of citizens (Gross, 2015).
When Procedural Hearings due
Procedural hearings are usually due once an issue has been brought before a court of law. It is part of the pre-trial process, and its primary objective is to facilitate a faster and smooth resolution of the case. Through a procedural hearing, key issues in the case are identified and the best way to go ahead with the case is established. The contentious issues get to be reduced to those that are appropriate and only relevant for the court to decide. The manner in which the case will proceed is determined by the judicial officer in conjunction with the disputing parties and their counsels (Gross, 2015).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Some of the Procedural Roadblocks to Judicial Review?
One of the procedural roadblocks to judicial review is the Doctrine of Standing. This is a doctrine created by the court, and which establishes whether a court will hear a specific federal lawsuit or not (Shriver Center, 2016). According to the courts, the plaintiff in a federal lawsuit has the responsibility of proving his "standing to sue." It is a unique case-specific determination and places jurisdictional limitations on the ability of a court to review the actions of the government. Another procedural roadblock to judicial review is the doctrine of ripeness. This doctrine states that a case will not be decided before necessity arising for the case to be decided (Shriver Center, 2016). The doctrine of mootness is another procedural roadblock to judicial review. This doctrine prevents a judge from making decisions about concluded disputes and in which legal resolution will not have a practical impact (Shriver Center, 2016).
How the Process Work
Judicial review in the US is conducted by the Supreme Court and involves the reviewing of the laws and actions of the Congress and the president, to establish their constitutionality. The process stands out as an essential principle of the US federal government system in which the actions of the legislative and executive branches of the government can be reviewed and even invalidated by the Judiciary. Through the application of the judicial review doctrine, the Supreme Court helps ensure that the different branches of the government follow the country's constitution. Issues and actions that may be addressed through judicial review include Executive actions, Legislative actions, state and local laws, regulations issued by a governmental agency, judicial errors as well as state and local laws (Shriver Center, 2016).
What is Deference?
Deference refers to the judicial respect of the decisions or actions of a prerogative or statutory authority. It is mostly reflected in need for a judicial review application to establish a solid case for error before the court's intervention.
References
Grossi, S. (2016). Procedural Due Process. Seton Hall Cir . Rev., 13, 155.
Shriver Center (2016). Federal Practice Manual for Legal Aid Attorneys . Retrieved from http://www.federalpracticemanual.org/node/3
