You will recognize the hypothetical set of facts below from your prior discussio

You will recognize the hypothetical set of facts below from your prior discussion of Marbury v. Madison. Now we apply the test in Baker v. Carr to this same set of facts.
The text of the Constitution (particularly Art I, section 8, concerning congressional powers) has many checks and balances on Executive power over foreign relations:
(1) The President negotiates treaties, but the senate approves or disapproves those treaties.
(2) The President is the commander in chief of the army and navy, but Congress
(a) raises and supports the army and navy,
(b) makes regulations governing both, and
(c) has the power to declare war.
(3) Congress has the independent power to spend, and could cut off funds as it sees fit.
Suppose that, by order of the President, the Secretary of Defense provided military intelligence, arms, and supplies to support the rebels in a civil war in a foreign nation. A member of Congress sues the President and Secretary of Defense for violating the Constitution.
Imagine that you have been asked by the President to craft an argument that the court should dismiss this lawsuit, based on Baker v. Carr. If the court dismisses the lawsuit, then the lawsuit ends. There will be no evidence gathering, trial, or legal decision.
Do not discuss whether the member of Congress has standing to bring the lawsuit.
ASSIGNMENT INSTRUCTIONS:
Answer the following questions:
List the six principles that Justice Brennan uses to define political questions? Can you group those six principles by subject matter? Are any of the principles alike?
Apply those principles to the set of facts above. Conclude with a statement of whether you think the President can win this point in court.
Please refer to pages 297 – 306 of the attached