The Supreme Court has developed seven rules, called the "Ashwander Rules" 
(Ashwander v Tennessee Valley Authority 297 US 288,346 (1935)) for 
qualifying a case to be heard there. According to Justice Brandeis: "The 
Court developed, for its own governance in the cases confessedly 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:

     1. 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 
was never 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.' Chicago & Grand Trunk RR v 
Wellman, 143 U.S. 339,345.
     2. The Court will not 'anticipate a question of constitutional law in 
advance of the necessity of deciding it.' Wilshire Oil Co. v US, 295 US 188 
'It is not the habit of the Court to decide questions of a constitutional 
nature unless absolutely necessary to the decision of a case.' Burton v US, 
196 US 283,295.
     3. The Court will not 'formulate a rule of constitutional law broader 
than is required by the precise facts to which it is to be applied.' 
Liverpool N.Y. & P.S.S. Co. v Emigration Commissioners, 113 US 33,39.
     4. 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. This rule has found most varied 
application. Thus, 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. Light v 
US, 220 US 523,538.
     5. 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. 
Tyler v The Judges, 179 US 405  Among the many applications of this rule, 
none is more striking than the denial of the right of challenge to one who 
lacks a personal or property right.
     6. The Court will not pass upon the constitutionality of a statute at 
the instance of one who has availed himself of its benefits. Great Falls 
Mfg. Co. v Attorney General 124 US 581.
     7. 'When the validity of an act of 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.' Crowell v 
Benson, 285 US 22,62."