Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: xzins; kabar; PSYCHO-FREEP; C. Edmund Wright; Mad Dawgg; P-Marlowe; wmfights
Uniformly applying an unjust law does not guarantee equal protection, and the fact that it hasn’t been challenged to date simply doesn’t excuse the law if it, in fact, denies equal protection.

You have to have standing to challenge it. Nobody had standing before.

But any candidate who was denied a place on the ballot now has the standing to challenge this rule.

I only hope and pray that Perry and Gingrich and Bachman and Santorum all march down to the court on Tuesday and file their lawsuits. I will contribute to the defense fund.

This kind of arbitrary rule making just irks me to no end. The system is designed to protect incumbents who don't have to qualify under this system. It also encourages and rewards election fraud.

Every patriotic conservative should be up in arms over this.

208 posted on 12/24/2011 10:55:38 AM PST by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies ]


To: P-Marlowe

>> You have to have standing to challenge it. Nobody had standing before. But any candidate who was denied a place on the ballot now has the standing to challenge this rule. >>

EXACTLY!!!!!!! This is the point that the ninnies who are crying “foul” and “sore loser” can’t get through their narrow little minds. You can’t challenge a rule until it has harmed you - and it won’t have “harmed you” until it is applied. Thus today is the first day it can be challenged.

Slam dunk on your part. Great point.


213 posted on 12/24/2011 10:58:35 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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