Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: LibLieSlayer

“It was ruled that an individual cannot sue on behalf of a State.”

I’m not a lawyer, but the ruling also seemed to imply that no citizen has standing to sue the state to enforce properly enacted laws.


26 posted on 06/27/2013 5:30:40 AM PDT by riverdawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]


To: riverdawg
I’m not a lawyer, but the ruling also seemed to imply that no citizen has standing to sue the state to enforce properly enacted laws.

I think the ruling affirms something that the U.S. Supreme Court has said for a long time: that no citizen has standing to sue a state in Federal court to enforce properly enacted state laws.

This, by the way, was exactly why the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear the case involving the pre-election nonsense in New Jersey back in the 2002 U.S. Senate election when Robert Torricelli was replaced on the ballot after the ballot deadline.

29 posted on 06/27/2013 5:36:34 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("I am the master of my fate ... I am the captain of my soul.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]

To: riverdawg

I was just repeating what Levin and Krauthammer had said.

LLS


46 posted on 06/27/2013 6:33:38 AM PDT by LibLieSlayer (FROM MY COLD, DEAD HANDS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson