12 December 2020

Lack Of Standing

I propose a change in doctrine, if not a Constitutional amendment, where if a case is rejected or dismissed for a lack of standing; the court MUST identify precisely who DOES.

Refusing a case on a lack of standing makes an implication that the case would have merit, if only the plaintiff had standing to bring the case before them.

I am thinking that if they had to tell us whom actually did have standing, they'd be taking more cases because they'd be seeing those plaintiffs coming forward immediately after such a rejection.

No comments:

Post a Comment

You are a guest here when you comment. This is my soapbox, not yours. Be polite. Inappropriate comments will be deleted without mention. Amnesty period is expired.

Do not go off on a tangent, stay with the topic of the post. If I can't tell what your point is in the first couple of sentences I'm flushing it.

If you're trying to comment anonymously: Sign your work. Try this link for an explanation: https://mcthag.blogspot.com/2023/04/lots-of-new-readers.html

Anonymous comments must pass a higher bar than others. Repeat offenders must pass an even higher bar.

If you can't comprehend this, don't comment; because I'm going to moderate and mock you for wasting your time.