Author Topic: The Lopsided State of Legal 'Standing' in Immigration Cases  (Read 176 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

rangerrebew

  • Guest
The Lopsided State of Legal 'Standing' in Immigration Cases
« on: October 05, 2018, 04:38:14 pm »
The Lopsided State of Legal 'Standing' in Immigration Cases
 
By Dan Cadman on October 4, 2018

One of the most slippery concepts in civil law is that of "standing" — a legal concept that defines whether or not a person or entity has the right to sue for an alleged wrong. To a large extent, whether or not there is a basis for a finding that the person or entity has suffered, or will suffer, actual harm depends on how the presiding judge sees the world. So standing is very much subject to whether or not that particular judge sees the American jurisprudence system and the Constitution in narrow terms, or whether the judge believes the courts can be used as leverage to accomplish socially desirable goals.

https://cis.org/Cadman/Lopsided-State-Legal-Standing-Immigration-Cases
« Last Edit: October 05, 2018, 04:38:55 pm by rangerrebew »

rangerrebew

  • Guest
Re: The Lopsided State of Legal 'Standing' in Immigration Cases
« Reply #1 on: October 05, 2018, 04:40:09 pm »
The term jurisprudence should be thrown out an replaced with jurisbias which is the predominate judicial view these days.  :judge: