[3][4] In that case, Chief Justice John Marshall drew a distinction between two different functions of the U.S. Secretary of State.
[3] Marshall argued that Courts should generally not hear cases where political questions were involved and individual rights were not implicated (later versions of the political question doctrine argued that it applied even if individual rights were at stake[attribution needed]).
[4] It is justified by the notion that there exist some questions best resolved through the political process, in which voters can approve or correct the challenged action by voting for or against those involved in the decision, or simply beyond judicial capability.
[5][4] In that case, the Supreme Court held that an unequal apportionment of a state legislature may have denied equal protection and presented a justiciable issue.
[4] In the Baker opinion, the Court outlined six characteristics "[p]rominent on the surface of any case held to involve a political question":[5] The first factor—a textually demonstrable commitment to another branch—is the classical view that the Court must decide all cases and issues before it unless, as a matter of constitutional interpretation, the Constitution itself has committed the determination of the issue to another branch of government.
[6] The second and third factors—lack of judicially discoverable standards and involvement of the judiciary in nonjudicial policy determinations—suggest a functional approach, based on practical considerations of how government ought to work.
[7] The final three factors—lack of respect for other branches, need for adherence to a political decision already made, and possibility of embarrassment—are based on the Court's prudential consideration against overexertion or aggrandizement.
[9] On this ground, the Court refused in Luther v. Borden to decide which group was the legitimate government of Rhode Island.
In the case of bin Ali Jaber v. United States (2017), the plaintiffs filed a lawsuit under the Torture Victim Protection Act of 1991 after a 2012 U.S. drone strike killed five civilians.
[17] There have been multiple cases on the justiciability of gerrymandering: In the case of Ghane v. Mid-South (January 16, 2014),[21] the Mississippi Supreme Court held that a wrongful death action against a private military company by the family of a deceased United States Navy SEAL could proceed under Mississippi law since the plaintiff's claims did not present a non-justiciable political question under Baker v. Carr (1962).
[23][24] Other acts include the President's decision to dissolve Parliament, award honors, or grant amnesty.
[24] Such actes de gouvernement need to be politically-based and also concern domains in which the courts are not competent to judge, e.g. national security and international relations.
[25] The Supreme Court of Japan was in part trying to avoid deciding the merits of cases under Article 9 of the post-war pacifist constitution, which renounces war and the threat or use of force.
[34] In the Tomabechi case, the Court also decided against judicial review by implicitly invoking the political question doctrine, citing the separation of powers as justification.
[35] On 9 September 2010, a panel of the Federal Supreme Court of Switzerland decided, by three votes to two, to dismiss the suit as presenting a political question not subject to Swiss civil jurisdiction.