View Single Post
Old 08-29-2012, 11:32 PM   #35
truportodfa

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
376
Senior Member
Default
One blockade that the SCOTUS loves to throw in the way of any case they don't want to face is the blockade of the plaintiff not having "standing".

In other words, unless the senators and congressmen can show that they were directly and materially harmed by the war, the SCOTUS will more than likely throw the case out for lack of standing. I doubt being a congressman by itself establishes standing in the SCOTUS's eyes.

I think that's usually a bullshit excuse on their part. Every American citizen should be considered to have standing for constitutional cases, because when the government violates the constitution we are all materially harmed. Unfortunately the SCOTUS doesn't see it that way.
It's like declaring the defendants of tax evasion cases in which the individual is on trial for not paying income tax and rightly claims the 10th amendment, frivolous claims. It's a pretty sad state of affairs if you ask me.
truportodfa is offline


 

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:28 AM.
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Design & Developed by Amodity.com
Copyright© Amodity