That doesn't have anything to do with it. At least in this situation, it's completely irrelevant who he is suing as to whether the plaintiff has standing to bring the action. The question, rather, is whether the injury is indivdiual and particularized or whether is it a general injury shared by the public.
And YOU are the non-lawyer I’m talking about.
Yeah, this old antitrust lawyer I guess just doesn't have a clue. It's not like I litigated--and won--an Article III and prudential standing case in the last year or anything.
Well I do apologize for my assumption. Most who bellow about law aren’t lawyers.
I still don’t agree with you about standing though. I believe as a Democrat he has standing for the reason stated in the complaint. (Although I suspect that complaint was written for public consumption and not as much for the court).
If the Democrats have nominated a Constitutionally unqualified candidate then in essence his vote would be a nullity and would therefore deprive him of his right to vote. I believe a constructive denial of that right to vote would indeed give him standing to challenge his own party on their nominee.
I really don’t like his complaint because it cites internet rumor and wikipedia among other things. I would like to see his exhibits if he has any.
I again didn’t mean to come off rudely.