j"19HxigV4QyBv3tHpQVcUEQyq1pzZVdoAutM From schear.steve at gmail.com Sat Dec 12 13:32:10 2020
From: schear.steve at gmail.com (Steven Schear)
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 2020 21:32:10 +0000
Subject: How to get standing - SCOTUS tosses TX case - USA 2020 Elections:
Thread
In-Reply-To: <20201212073535.GA1271298@eye.freedbms.net>
References: <CAD2Ti29B9atk57exvuydO3nxFrSW2v7TDgVmQqePgkU5hHL+3A@mail.gmail.com>
<CAD2Ti28CYUCzVTxSvbWink3hTv0Qc0c+_0GA83Fq-3+pasCH8Q@mail.gmail.com>
<CAD2Ti2-S0QSLuP5Eekp1kFium1D_QuSzT=x1BQmAbs2Dzr-63g@mail.gmail.com>
<CAD2Ti29cu9R=Ka6sxnF=SwRarc=vKFmNhpnorbLrWGsRCRnSfQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAD2Ti2-txXuPzoUVfRLELDndTMDTCedNvHvKWEFXyiTRjBmQ=Q@mail.gmail.com>
<20201212071723.GA1261854@eye.freedbms.net>
<20201212073535.GA1271298@eye.freedbms.net>
Message-ID: <CAMyHXXcJx9pHz5G7o2e_2dHYwURkLyDQaHHJATcQXV_ALkUrsA@mail.gmail.com>
So let me get this straight. These so-called high powered lawyers
mis-estimated whether SCOTUS would assume Texas has standing (standing is
the first basic test to determine in a U.S. court if a plaintiff is
qualified to bring a suit). Give me a break! Only 2nd or 3rd string
constitutional lawyers could make this error.
On Sat, Dec 12, 2020, 7:36 AM Zenaan Harkness <zen at freedbms.net> wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 12, 2020 at 06:17:23PM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> > Citing a lack of standing, Justice Samuel Alito wrote in a brief
> order that the state "has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest
> in the manner in which another State conducts its elections," adding "All
> other pending motions are dismissed as moot."
> >
> > Supreme Court Tosses Texas Bid To Overturn Election
> >
> https://www.zerohedge.com/political/supreme-court-tosses-texas-bid-overturn-election
> >
> >
> >
> > Well, citizens of the swing states have standing, so they can file.
> >
> > Trumpers, both legal eagles and folks in their personal capacity, in the
> 4 swing states (GA, PA, WI, MI?) need to file this case from their home
> turf, as their interest is surely direct and personal - effected personally.
> >
> > I guess this is new territory for some folks...
>
>
> Once parties with sufficient standing ARE properly filed and listed, the
> Amicus Curiae 19 states can still join in support.
>
> Just need lots of folks WITH standing in the 4 swing states at issue -
> this is what SCOTUS implied "insufficient standing", i.e. we need folks who
> DO have standing!
>
> Voters in GA, PA, MI, WI, each DO have direct standing. Folks from EACH
> of these 4 states must now file, in order to solve this technicality of
> "insufficient standing".
>
> Good luck from Aus!
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 2291 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20201212/8e98f7b6/attachment.txt>
text/plainbinary(db1327c2aecaaa1e1bd0ef6529e7ad8e48c470fd
https://whatsonchain.com/tx/6cefec63baf4e6beb99065f99ea1581201ac8346c820ccd09f452f69d78cc24f