The first thorough examination of the constitutional provision controlling access to the federal courts, this book traces the case-or-controversy limitation (Article III, Section 2) from its genesis in the Constitutional Convention through its evolution during 188 years of application by the United States Supreme Court. Although the federal judiciary has not opened its doors to all comers, the Supreme Court and the Congress have liberalized access in public law actions.

From the lawyer's perspective, this book considers when an action may properly be brought before a federal court. From the political scientist's perspective, it considers who may bring what political issue before the federal court and when judicial power may be invoked.

A unique feature of this book is its clear distinction between the integral components of the case-or-controversy provision and judicially created doctrines. The integral components are adversity, the sources of legal rights and remedies, the existence of a sufficient interest by the parties, the presence of an actual justiciable controversy, and the finality of the federal court's judgment. The judicially created doctrines include advisory opinions, standing, ripeness, mootness, and political questions. In creating these doctrines and assuming the role of soverign definer, the Supreme Court has based its discretion on the Constitution's lack of definition of "case" or "controversy." Congress, too, has played a role by enacting such statutes as the Declaratory Judgment Act and the Administrative Procedure Act. Thus the original private law concept of case of controversy has evolved into a politically important public law concept.