The Conservative Cave

Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: CC27 on July 03, 2023, 11:31:39 AM

Title: I don't think you need "standing" to get a case in front of the SCOTUS any long
Post by: CC27 on July 03, 2023, 11:31:39 AM
Quote
boston bean (35,516 posts)


I don't think you need "standing" to get a case in front of the SCOTUS any longer.

You can bring a fake case where no damage has occurred to anyone and affect millions upon millions in a negative way. (Wedding website creator).

You can bring a case and have it decided where the actual entity refuses to be party and have it decided affecting millions in a negative way. (Student loans).


https://www.democraticunderground.com/100218061974


Moron.
Title: Re: I don't think you need "standing" to get a case in front of the SCOTUS any long
Post by: Muddling 2 on July 03, 2023, 11:48:51 AM

Moron.

What's really amusing is EffetteSnob and Ocelot have both made numerous posts showing this is a lie and yet people keep posting bullshit.

 :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:
Title: Re: I don't think you need "standing" to get a case in front of the SCOTUS any long
Post by: SVPete on July 03, 2023, 11:51:06 AM
Is boston bean still ordering Cracker Jack by the pallet, hoping to find her law degree? :mental:  :rotf:

In the real world, the website designer, like Masterpiece Cakes was attacked by gay/lesbian activists and the State of Colorado. The legal costs - $$ and time - of defending themselves from the unconstitutional attacks of their Free Speech and Free Exercise rights are real damages. Being slandered by the State of Colorado and the gay/lesbian activists is a real damage. The business lost due to the slander, unconstitutional regulatory action, and potential customers being uncertain if the attacked businesses will be in business long enough to complete projects is a real damage. They have been damaged, therefore they have standing (something lower courts recognized before the USSC took the case, and the three dissenters did not deny).

What DU-Moron boston bean won't say out loud - and which is not necessary on DU - is that she believes the website designer deserves all those very real damages.
Title: Re: I don't think you need "standing" to get a case in front of the SCOTUS any long
Post by: Old n Grumpy on July 03, 2023, 12:07:10 PM
What's really amusing is EffetteSnob and Ocelot have both made numerous posts showing this is a lie and yet people keep posting bullshit.

 :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:


They can’t believe the truth no matter how many times it is explained to them..
They are the type who is worried about reserving a deck chair even though the ship is sinking  :thatsright:
Title: Re: I don't think you need "standing" to get a case in front of the SCOTUS any long
Post by: 67 Rover on July 03, 2023, 02:08:29 PM


They can’t believe the truth no matter how many times it is explained to them..
They are the type who is worried about reserving a deck chair even though the ship is sinking  :thatsright:

Hell, even the Titan sub could not spot Brandon's low poll numbers. Well before imploding that is. :-)
Title: Re: I don't think you need "standing" to get a case in front of the SCOTUS any long
Post by: Old n Grumpy on July 03, 2023, 02:28:31 PM
Hell, even the Titan sub could not spot Brandon's low poll numbers. Well before imploding that is. :-)

The implosion was Brandon’s poll numbers  :thatsright: :p :lmao: :lmao :cheersmate: :cheersmate: :cheersmate: :cheersmate: