Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: FS11

Did the Muslim suing to have Oklahoma not implement their anti-sharia law present psychiatrists’ bills?

Did the people who sued to keep AZ from enforcing their immigration enforcement law present psychiatrists’ bills?

According to the standards for “standing” that have been applied in the eligibility suits, none of these people even have “standing”. Now you want them to prove that they suffered real, certified harm before they can even get accepted as a legitimate “case”?

Did Roe of Roe v Wade present documentation that the law against abortion caused her real harm? By the time the case was decided she wasn’t even pregnant any more and wasn’t raising the child either. Did she have a psychologist’s assessment that she was harmed in some way?

Fremont, NE has been stopped from enforcing the ordinance the voters passed back in 2008 requiring landlords to verify legal immigration status before renting to someone. I think the ACLU has filed that lawsuit. Why would ACLU have “standing”, and how could they even represent ANYBODY with “standing” since nobody could show any real damages since the ordinance has never been able to go into effect?

All this stuff about “standing” is really just a signed blank check for a judge to blow off anything they don’t want to address. They change the requirements for “standing” at will, based on their own political whims. They are the government; they can shaft whoever they want to shaft and there’s not a dang thing any of us peons can do within the legal system to stop them.

THAT is the lesson of this whole Obama coup, and its “fundamental transformation of America”. It’s an experiment to see what happens when America becomes just like any other third-world tyranny.


102 posted on 11/29/2010 3:35:10 PM PST by butterdezillion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies ]


To: butterdezillion

All this stuff about “standing” is really just a signed blank check for a judge to blow off anything they don’t want to address. They change the requirements for “standing” at will, based on their own political whims. They are the government; they can shaft whoever they want to shaft and there’s not a dang thing any of us peons can do within the legal system to stop them.

102 posted on Monday, November 29, 2010 5:35:10 PM by butterdezillion


I agree to an extent but I am not quite so pessimistic about America’s future.

Be sure to read Winter’s Essay on Standing, it coincides with your premise.

http://standupamericaus.com/our-privilege-our-right-and-our-duty-civilian-grand-jury:33320


104 posted on 11/29/2010 3:46:04 PM PST by FS11
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


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