<P> In the federal system, courts may only decide actual cases or controversies; it is not possible to request the federal courts to review a law without at least one party having legal standing to engage in a lawsuit . This principle means that courts sometimes do not exercise their power of review, even when a law is seemingly unconstitutional, for want of jurisdiction . In some state courts, such as the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, legislation may be referred in certain circumstances by the legislature or by the executive for an advisory ruling on its constitutionality prior to its enactment (or enforcement). </P> <P> The U.S. Supreme Court seeks to avoid reviewing the Constitutionality of an act where the case before it could be decided on other grounds, an attitude and practice exemplifying judicial restraint . Justice Brandeis framed it thus (citations omitted): </P> <Table> <Tr> <Td> "</Td> <Td> The Court developed, for its own governance in the cases within its jurisdiction, a series of rules under which it has avoided passing upon a large part of all the constitutional questions pressed upon it for decision . They are: <Ol> <Li> The Court will not pass upon the constitutionality of legislation in a friendly, non-adversary, proceeding, declining because to decide such questions is legitimate only in the last resort, and as a necessity in the determination of real, earnest, and vital controversy between individuals . It never was the thought that, by means of a friendly suit, a party beaten in the legislature could transfer to the courts an inquiry as to the constitutionality of the legislative act . </Li> <Li> The Court will not anticipate a question of constitutional law in advance of the necessity of deciding it . It is not the habit of the court to decide questions of a constitutional nature unless absolutely necessary to a decision of the case . </Li> <Li> The Court will not formulate a rule of constitutional law broader than required by the precise facts it applies to . </Li> <Li> The Court will not pass upon a constitutional question although properly presented by the record, if there is also present some other ground upon which the case may be disposed of...If a case can be decided on either of two grounds, one involving a constitutional question, the other a question of statutory construction or general law, the Court will decide only the latter . </Li> <Li> The Court will not pass upon the validity of a statute upon complaint of one who fails to show that he is injured by its operation . </Li> <Li> The Court will not pass upon the constitutionality of a statute at the instance of one who has availed himself of its benefits . </Li> <Li> When the validity of an act of the Congress is drawn in question, and even if a serious doubt of constitutionality is raised, it is a cardinal principle that this Court will first ascertain whether a construction of the statute is fairly possible by which the question may be avoided . </Li> </Ol> </Td> <Td>" </Td> </Tr> </Table> <Tr> <Td> "</Td> <Td> The Court developed, for its own governance in the cases within its jurisdiction, a series of rules under which it has avoided passing upon a large part of all the constitutional questions pressed upon it for decision . They are: <Ol> <Li> The Court will not pass upon the constitutionality of legislation in a friendly, non-adversary, proceeding, declining because to decide such questions is legitimate only in the last resort, and as a necessity in the determination of real, earnest, and vital controversy between individuals . It never was the thought that, by means of a friendly suit, a party beaten in the legislature could transfer to the courts an inquiry as to the constitutionality of the legislative act . </Li> <Li> The Court will not anticipate a question of constitutional law in advance of the necessity of deciding it . It is not the habit of the court to decide questions of a constitutional nature unless absolutely necessary to a decision of the case . </Li> <Li> The Court will not formulate a rule of constitutional law broader than required by the precise facts it applies to . </Li> <Li> The Court will not pass upon a constitutional question although properly presented by the record, if there is also present some other ground upon which the case may be disposed of...If a case can be decided on either of two grounds, one involving a constitutional question, the other a question of statutory construction or general law, the Court will decide only the latter . </Li> <Li> The Court will not pass upon the validity of a statute upon complaint of one who fails to show that he is injured by its operation . </Li> <Li> The Court will not pass upon the constitutionality of a statute at the instance of one who has availed himself of its benefits . </Li> <Li> When the validity of an act of the Congress is drawn in question, and even if a serious doubt of constitutionality is raised, it is a cardinal principle that this Court will first ascertain whether a construction of the statute is fairly possible by which the question may be avoided . </Li> </Ol> </Td> <Td>" </Td> </Tr>

The united states supreme court can hold acts of congress unconstitutional