[Bishop_Malachi]

No court said “there is no standing.” They said Lin Wood has no standing. Because he doesn’t, under long established tenets of the standing doctrine.

___________________________________________________

Just curious...because I’m not a lawyer. I have read the legal definition of “standing”. Why is it that no cases brought at the behest of Trump have standing?

[White Lives Matter]

You would think Trump has standing because he was personally harmed by the election theft.

[The Pack Knight]

You both ask why courts have held Trump lacks standing. But your premise is incorrect. Courts have not held that Trump lacks standing to bring election lawsuits. Out of all the lawsuits brought by Trump, I can only think of one where any claim was dismissed for lack of standing: The federal case in Pennsylvania, where the district court Trump had no standing to bring two specific claims: (1) a claim under the Electors Clause, which the 3rd Circuit had previously held belongs only to a state legislature; and (2) a claim for the violation of voters’ 14th Amendment rights, which the court held belongs only to those voters. Trump conceded the first point in his briefing in the trial court, and challenged neither ruling on appeal.

I think you both have been misled into the belief that every court has dismissed Trump’s lawsuits for lack of standing, but that just isn’t true. They have correctly held that Lin Wood, who sued on his own behalf as an individual voter, lacked standing to challenge election results, and that the State of Texas lacked standing to challenge the results of other states’ elections.