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

To: DiogenesLamp
"Well if the courts are going to be consistent, those New Yorkers will be denied standing. "

The courts are political, you know that.

And it's a STATE suit, not Federal.

As far as I know all of Obama's suits were either Federal, or after the fact of his election.

Cruz's opponents have 50 opportunities.

9 posted on 02/18/2016 8:10:10 PM PST by Mariner (War Criminal #18 - Be The Leaderless Resistance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]


To: Mariner
And it's a STATE suit, not Federal.

Still gotta have standing. According to the rules they've beaten us over the head with regarding Obama, "citizens" don't have "standing" to sue, because they do not have a direct "injury" as a result of a non eligible candidate winning an election.

I'm going to assume the courts will be too embarrassed to suddenly decide that Cruz opponents will have more standing than Obama's opponents, but who knows. Consistency is not a requirement in our modern judiciary.

Cruz's opponents have 50 opportunities.

You would think so, but the last ruling I paid any attention to said that states are not required to vet candidates. :) Seems like utter nonsense to me, but that's why these judges draw the big bucks. :)

29 posted on 02/18/2016 8:27:05 PM PST by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | 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