Who Will Be Left Standing in the Supreme Court?

[Elderberry]

NY Times by Linda Greenhouse 1/16/2020

The Trump administration is doing its best to kick plaintiffs out of lawsuits it opposes.

Pop quiz No. 1: What do the following have in common: an abortion clinic in Louisiana; the county of El Paso, Tex.; and two individuals who don’t want to buy health insurance?

Answer: All are plaintiffs in federal court.

The Hope Medical Group for Women, in Shreveport, La., is the petitioner in the June Medical case now at the Supreme Court, challenging the constitutionality of Louisiana’s latest effort to shut down the state’s few remaining abortion clinics.

El Paso County is suing the Trump administration to stop construction of a new section of border wall on its southern border with Mexico that will be paid for in part by siphoning off millions of dollars that Congress intended for a project at the Fort Bliss Army base, the county’s biggest employer and economic engine.

And Neill Hurley and John Nantz, the two men who object to being told to buy health insurance?

This is a column about standing to sue. It may seem an oddly dry choice of topic with a presidential impeachment about to get underway and the world flying apart at an even faster pace than usual.

More: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/16/opinion/supreme-court-trump.html

[Cyber Liberty]

This is a column about standing to sue.

I learned all I needed to know about "standing" during the O'Bastard forged Birth Certificate lawsuits.  At the end of the day, all the cases were eventually dismissed because the Plaintiffs lacked "Standing."  Now, if Electoral College electors and various Secretaries of State can be said to have no standing on the Constitutionality of O'Bastard's election to the highest Office of the land, then absolutely nobody does.

"Standing" has become a magic trick to make legitimate lawsuits disappear.