Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Las Vegas Ron

“I can see where that could cause huge problems, is this why courts have been refusing to here cases based on standing, is that their way to wiggle out of it?”

No. The easiest way to explain this is that before a case can be filed, a certain check list has to be met with the court.

Generally speaking, the first issue would be jurisdiction. Does the court have the authority to hear the case?

The second issue would be standing. Does the plaintiff have the right to bring the case?

The political question doctrine would generally not really matter until after those issues are resolved.

Judges in the birther cases have addressed all issues in their decisions. Judge Carter in California for instance pointed out that the District Court there did not have jurisdiction over a quo warranto proceeding. He further explained that all the defendants with the possible exception of Keyes could never have standing. Keyes could have standing under the right circumstances. But since it was after an election, it would be a political question best left to Congress.

Now, I have to go on lunch break at Soros, Inc. We have a great cafeteria.


68 posted on 02/19/2010 5:29:18 PM PST by MrRobertPlant2009
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies ]


To: MrRobertPlant2009
Now, I have to go on lunch break at Soros, Inc. We have a great cafeteria.

Don't forget to wipe your chin when you're done.

72 posted on 02/19/2010 5:37:40 PM PST by Las Vegas Ron ("Because without America, there is no free world" - Canada Free Press - MSM where are you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


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