Constitutional validity can only be judged against concrete facts in real cases

Evidence

In many cases it would be difficult or even impossible to say abstractly and unconditionally that a statute is or is not qonstitutional. In part its provisions may be unconstitutional, yet the remainder may be constitutional. /itations omitted: A statute may be unconstitutional as applied to some states of fact, but constitutional as applied to others. ffitations amitted47 Only when the impact of a statute upon particular individuals, who have both the opportunity and the incentive to defend their rights by argument, and upon a set of definite facts established after genuine controversy,. has been shown, can a court decide a constitutional question with confidence that relevant considerations have not been overlooked. — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process, 3493

Categorization

• XREF: Directly connects to ch46’s claim that adjudication requires concrete controversy and competing arguments — the ‘opportunity and incentive to defend rights’ rationale. Also to ch2’s legislative vs adjudicative facts. — connects to: Courts decide constitutional questions only when a live case compels it — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process: Basic Problems in…, 3488; Motivation for a ruling must be distinguished from constitutional causality — Philip Chase Bobbitt, Reflections Inspired by My Critics, 807; Judicial decisions are governed by beliefs about facts and rules — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 160 (+10 more)
• QUESTION: Why courts require genuine controversy before ruling on constitutionality — worth chasing the as-applied vs facial distinction for the course.

Broader Connections

• Courts refuse constitutional questions based upon inadequate factual records #exemplifies (0.85) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 909
• Motivation for a ruling must be distinguished from constitutional causality #complicates (0.75) — Philip Chase Bobbitt, Reflections Inspired by My Critics, 807
• Judicial decisions are governed by beliefs about facts and rules #corroborates (0.70) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 160
• Historical law-statements require generalizing away from unique facts #contradicts (0.70)
• Historical narratives function as disguised lessons in constitutional law #complicates (0.70) — Michel Foucault, Society Must Be Defended, 141
• Judges make hidden factual assumptions that parties cannot challenge #corroborates (0.70) — Frederick Schauer, Thinking Like a Lawyer, 397
• A case is precedent only when material facts match exactly #qualifies (0.70) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1299