A more thorough explanation:

Definition: The Political Question Doctrine is a legal principle that federal courts will not hear cases that involve political issues. This means that if a case is deemed to be too politically charged, the court will refuse to hear it. The doctrine is also known as the justiciability doctrine or the nonjusticiability doctrine.

One example of the Political Question Doctrine is the case of Oetjen v. Central Leather Co. (1918). In this case, the Supreme Court found that issues related to foreign relations are the sole responsibility of the Executive Branch. Therefore, cases that challenge the way in which the Executive uses that power are considered political questions and cannot be presided over by the court.

Another example is the case of Baker v. Carr (1962), where the Supreme Court held that federal courts should not hear cases that deal directly with issues that the Constitution makes the sole responsibility of the Executive Branch and/or the Legislative Branch.

The doctrine was also extended to lawsuits that challenge the Legislative Branch's procedure for impeachment proceedings in the case of Nixon v. United States (1993).

The Political Question Doctrine is based on the idea that certain issues are too politically charged for the court to handle. The court is viewed as an apolitical branch of government, and therefore, it should not get involved in political matters. The examples illustrate how the court has applied this doctrine in cases related to foreign relations, the Executive Branch, the Legislative Branch, and impeachment proceedings. The doctrine ensures that the court remains impartial and does not become involved in political disputes.