Wednesday, July 10, 2019

This is odd .. “No Standing”

The Trump administration claims a ”victory” in this decision, but it seems odd to me.

The case was thrown out because the State of Maryland and District of Columbia have “no standing” to sue the President for violating the Constitution. I am not sure who does have “standing” to do that?

The idea of “no standing” as I understand it, means that the state or district isn’t being harmed by the President violating the Constitution.  But who is? I mean this means that the President violates the Constitution and as long as no one is “hurt” it’s okay.

Why doesn’t that work with speeding?  Why doesn’t that work for drug violations? Why doesn’t that work for regular people, why only the President?

1 comment:

  1. I haven't read the Complaint or the Ruling but it may be that the court believes plaintiffs cannot show they do or will suffer economic loss as a result of the hotel's business.


What is too much Taylor Swift

 This much ... when the singer is used to send a message about POSSIBLE future problems?