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

Skip to comments.

Breaking! President Trump’s Cases Against Big Tech Assigned to Two OBAMA Judges and One HW BUSH Judge
GP ^ | July 9, 2021 | Joe Hoft

Posted on 07/09/2021 10:38:11 AM PDT by White Lives Matter

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-38 last
To: TexasGurl24

“Do you even know what Standing is?”

I am extremely interested in what you think Standing is?


21 posted on 07/09/2021 11:09:39 AM PDT by DEPcom (Floyd died from being a drug addict. Drugs kill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: White Lives Matter

Trump wants this to go to the SCOTUS.


22 posted on 07/09/2021 11:12:49 AM PDT by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: White Lives Matter

Awww They don’t stand a chance. Fat chance these judges will hold big tech accountable. I remember back when we held all three branches we were pleading with our congressman senators to do something about big tech Because we knew that they were becoming too damn powerful and they were going to put their Nazi boots on our conservative necks. And sure enough Our biggest fear came true now look where we are At the present moment. Many of our representatives backstabbing traitorous SOBs were getting money through the back door and under the tables from these companies ....and now they have succeeded where the Democrats for years have wanted to silent conservatives.


23 posted on 07/09/2021 11:14:54 AM PDT by RoseofTexas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stanne

Of course, DJT planned this all, including his “loss” just so he could watch them, catch them and bring them to justice. Stunningly brilliant.


24 posted on 07/09/2021 11:15:48 AM PDT by Dave W
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: SubMareener
There is strong Supreme Court that the First Amendment applies to “private” Public Squares.

This is even more interesting in light of the Supreme Court's recent refusal to hear the case of the florist refusing to supply arrangements to a gay wedding, but could still run afoul of the 2018 case involving the baker in Colorado. On one hand, a business can't turn away a customer based on their free speech rights, but on the other, they can.

With a court all over the map on this, it'll be interesting to hear their decision. I have, however, absolutely no faith in Roberts, Kavanaugh, Barrett or Gorsuch doing the right thing.

25 posted on 07/09/2021 11:19:40 AM PDT by Magnatron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Bshaw
11th circuit Court of Appeals and Justice Thomas, (who oversees 11th circuit), will shepherd this through to conclusion.

Thanks,,,I was just looking for that.

26 posted on 07/09/2021 11:23:45 AM PDT by spokeshave (White Confederate statue kills black man......Another month of protests.... (HT to seawolf101))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: White Lives Matter

Hope they have the appeal written up.


27 posted on 07/09/2021 11:24:14 AM PDT by teletech (you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: White Lives Matter

The results of the Arizona audit may play a role in these cases. Results indicating fraud will cause public outcry and force hands who might otherwise try and suppress these cases.


28 posted on 07/09/2021 11:25:58 AM PDT by MichaelRDanger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: White Lives Matter

I can’t believe people still think it’s possible to fight this stuff in the courts. Those days are over. You’re not going to save what’s left of the country in the courts. They’ve all gone to the dark side.


29 posted on 07/09/2021 11:26:26 AM PDT by bluejean (Living one day at a time in the national psych ward.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: White Lives Matter

Sorry to brag, but I totally saw this coming. Very predictable. It’s collaborative effort on their part. And when pointed out they claim a conspiracy... until it all gets demonstrated conclusively.


30 posted on 07/09/2021 11:50:21 AM PDT by Obadiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dave W

He planned contingency for the steal. Why would he not. The entire govt is corrupt. How would you do it?


31 posted on 07/09/2021 11:53:46 AM PDT by stanne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: White Lives Matter

He did. Why wouldn’t he have?


32 posted on 07/09/2021 11:55:03 AM PDT by stanne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: DEPcom

It isn’t what I “think,” I actually know.

There are three basic elements to Article III Standing.

First, the plaintiff must have suffered an “injury in fact” an invasion of a legally-protected interest which is (a) concrete and particularized and (b) “actual or imminent, not ‘conjectural’ or ‘hypothetical.”

Second, “there must be a causal connection between the injury and the conduct complained of—the injury has to be “fairly . . . trace[able] to the challenged action of the defendant, and not . . . th[e] result [of] the independent action of some third party not before the court.”

Third, it must be “likely,” as opposed to merely “speculative,” that the injury will be “redressed by a favorable decision.”

The party invoking federal jurisdiction bears the burden of establishing these elements.

Standing is an Article III requirement, because the courts exist to adjudicate live controversies and not to issue advisory opinions. In the absence of a Constitutional standing requirement, anyone could run to the court to adjudicate hypothetical wrongs, which would turn the court into a super-legislature that would usurp the authority of the other branches of government.

“[T]he ‘case or controversy’ requirement defines with respect to the Judicial Branch the idea of separation of powers on which the Federal Government is founded. The several doctrines that have grown up to elaborate that requirement are ‘founded in concern about the proper—and properly limited— role of the courts in a democratic society.’”


33 posted on 07/09/2021 12:01:03 PM PDT by TexasGurl24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: romanesq

Unlikely to receive cert as Kavanaugh and Coney Barrett cannot withstand the threat of orchestrated complaints, and Robert’s hates Trump


34 posted on 07/09/2021 12:06:54 PM PDT by Sgt_Schultze (When your business model depends on slave labor, you're always going to need more slaves)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: White Lives Matter

It will go to the Supreme Court.


35 posted on 07/09/2021 1:59:49 PM PDT by odawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Georgia Girl 2
Trump wants this to go to the SCOTUS.

It has to get through several layers of federal court first, and I doubt it will survive that.

36 posted on 07/09/2021 2:26:03 PM PDT by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg

I don’t think you understand the way this stuff works. Not surprising. 😆


37 posted on 07/10/2021 7:35:21 AM PDT by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Georgia Girl 2
I don’t think you understand the way this stuff works.

Oh that's OK. I'm absolutely convinced that you haven't a clue on how almost anything works.

38 posted on 07/10/2021 9:26:02 AM PDT by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-38 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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