down portions of two statutes, which stripped the recently elected Democratic Governor of a broad variety of powers, including powers related to supervision of State Board of Elections, on separation-of-powers grounds). 14 . We further note that a majority of the Supreme Court has never found that a claim raised a nonjusticiable political question solely due to the alleged absence of a judicially manageable standard for adjudicating the claim. Rather, in each case in which the Supreme Court has found a claim nonjusticiable under the political doctrine, the Court has principally pointed to a textual commitment of the challenged action to a political branch in finding the claim nonjusticiable. See, e.g., Nixon v. United States, 506 U.S. 224, 228-36, 113 S.Ct. 732, 122 L.Ed.2d 1 (1993) (<HOLDING>); Gilligan v. Morgan, 413 U.S. 1, 10, 93 S.Ct.
holding that challenge to the procedure senate adopted for trying impeachment us const art i  3 cl 6 raised nonjusticiable political question holding that state may not exclude convicted felon as a candidate for the united states senate holding that an issue not raised in the trial court cannot be raised for the first time on appeal holding constitutional challenge to void statute may be raised for first time on appeal holding that challenge to vietnam war did not necessarily raise political question and remanding