That's a brilliant point. I wonder if we could get some patriot legal organization to take up that banner.
Or at least write up an article for American Thinker to get the ball rolling.
Having an attorney for the government make these claims directly to the members of Congress was probably not the smartest thing the Obama thugs ever did. My prayer is that it comes back to bite them in the butt.
Think of every discrimination lawsuit there is, every time somebody wants to say that a law discriminates. Until a person can prove that it already HAS caused them real harm - not just that it could potentially cause them harm, or just cause them non-material harm - they can’t even get a case before a court, according to this standard.
By this standard Roe v Wade could never have been decided - because until the child was born the abortion laws in effect couldn’t cause any material harm to an actual person, and once the child was born the matter would no longer have a court remedy.
This could be used on all the challenges to abortion laws. Nebraska is being challenged on the fetal pain law. Right now our AG needs to say that there is no case that can have federal jurisdiction because the law isn’t in effect yet and nobody has any material harm from it at this point so nobody can have standing.
That Muslim who is challenging Oklahoma’s anti-sharia law has no standing; surely the judges will throw it out on grounds of standing.
Come to think of it, the Herbst-O’Malley Agreement that IL made, agreeing to not enforce their born-alive infant law in exchange for not being sued was totally unnecessary, because nobody have standing to sue over the law until they were found guilty of breaking it and thus actually suffered material harm (supposedly)from it.
What this dude said could empty up our courtrroms just like that. Cool!
And if a judge can throw out a case before knowing anything about it, by ruling that the plaintiff has no chance of prevailing... hey, a judge can throw out ANYTHING! We could have judges who agree to get paid their salary and then just throw everything out saying that the plaintiff has no chance of winning so he/she doesn’t even have to hear the details of the case. They could even cite this governmnet lawyer giving legal counsel to Congress.
The trial lawyers should LOVE what this government lawyer told Congress. It would put them out of business, every last one of them.
And if judges have actually used those arguments to dismiss eligibility lawsuits, then let the fun begin because we now have legal precedent for those rationalizations.
They’ve made their bed; now let them lie in it. (Maybe I should say “lay in it” - bad grammar, but they’re obviously already lying. lol)