Stephen L. Morgan v. United States of America

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding under Article I, section 5, that court “lack[ed] jurisdiction to proceed” with respect to challenge to congressional election when House of Representatives had already seated individual
• observing that each house of Congress retains “exclusive authority . . . to decide whether to seat its members” (citing Roudebush v. Hartke, 405 U.S. 15, 19 (1972))
• recognizing possible \limited judicial interference” upon \a clear showing of such arbitrary and improvident use of the power [by the House] as will constitute a denial of due process of law.....”
• “Unless the Constitution were unconstitutional, one would think that, on those hypotheses, further review would certainly be barred.” (emphasis in original)
• “Unless the Constitution were unconstitutional, one would think that, on those hypotheses, further review would certainly be barred.” (emphasis in original)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).