'justiciability of' is grammatically correct and can be used in written English.
It refers to the ability of a legal issue or dispute to be resolved by a court or other judicial means. It is often used when discussing the scope of the court's power to rule on a particular matter. Example: The Supreme Court will determine the justiciability of the case involving the constitutionality of the new immigration policy.
This view is supported by several human rights bodies which, lacking jurisdiction over (or the justiciability of) economic, social and cultural rights, have interpreted the right to life to include subsistence rights.
The Court first recognized the justiciability of affirmative "racial gerrymandering" claims in Shaw v. Reno (1993).
First, the justiciability of an issue depends on the subject matter at hand and not the source of decision-making power.
Judicial Commissioner Menon rejected a highly rigid and categorical approach to determining the justiciability of an issue, because the theory of the separation of powers is to be interpreted and applied sensibly.
Thus, although this was not a judicial review case, the Court had to consider the justiciability of determining whether the treaty applied to Hong Kong, and whether the Court could depart from the views of the executive branch on the matter which were stated in a letter issued by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
In order to establish the legal basis, an analysis of domestic, regional, and international legal sources establishing the substance (normative content) and the justiciability of this right and human rights obligations needs to be undertaken.
And there was this acknowledgement: Because these questions of justiciability require dismissal of this case at the outset, the serious issues regarding the merits of the alleged authorization of the targeted killing of a U.S. citizen overseas must await another day or another (non-judicial) forum.
Nonetheless, the concept of justiciability is useful in determining the likelihood of whether an executive action is within the purview of judicial review.
As predicted virtually everywhere, except perhaps Federalist Society meeting halls, the effort to overrule the state Supreme Court by two of our most distinguished trial lawyers failed because a basic point of justiciability was absent.
Justiciability recognizes the limited capabilities of the courts.
Secondly, the purpose of calling them rights, and having them within the legal framework, is to recognise their justiciability, hence affording remedies to victims of abuse.
