108 Standing an Excuse to be Lazy

Before and after the 2020 election various plaintiffs were bring cases to court trying to argue that the various incidents of procedure change and questionable counting items were hurting them. Numerous times the court used this statement that the plaintiffs did not have “standing” to bring the case.

So just what is standing? Wikipedia summarizes “In the United States, the current doctrine is that a person cannot bring a suit challenging the constitutionality of a law unless they can demonstrate that they are or will "imminently" be harmed by the law. Otherwise, the court will rule that the plaintiff "lacks standing" to bring the suit, and will dismiss the case without considering the merits of the claim of unconstitutionality.”

So, even though people saw weird things happening during counting and wanted these perpetrators to say under oath what the were doing, the courts said that you have not proven you will be injured. Translating to English, you are caught red handed stealing but the court feels you are not injured, you have no standing and the case gets thrown out.

After the 2020 election all plaintiffs bring charged to the court knew there cases saying that injuries had not happened and you are not damaged but we cannot speculate that you would be damaged. Then a case seems to have standing only to be told that some obscure element is would prevent the court from being accessed.

Standing, the excuse used when the courts do not want to do their job.

The latest one is the a case submitted to the Supreme Court by a group of conservative states against the Biden administration claiming the Federal Government threatening social media platforms with negative actions if they did not effectively stifle postings that were against the government narrative. This was prevalent by the Corpse administration, the CDC, FDA, Fauci and Birx. It does not matter that this government interference is a first amendment violation. The supreme court said no one proved they were hurt so they weren't going to take the case. They did not have standing! https://editorialpinups.com/099-hiding.html

Wait! How can you say no one was hurt? Besides, is not the Supreme Court supposed to determine constitutionality of laws made by Congress and actions of the Executive Branch in enforcing said laws?This whole standing thing. How and why does it exist?

It is claimed that standing is defined in Article III of the Constitution. Say what? Here is Article III Section 2 of the constitution:

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;—to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;—to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;—to Controversies between two or more States;—between a State and Citizens of another State,—between Citizens of different States,—between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

It states controversies. Nowhere does it state damages. Some controversies are because of damages. Others are controversies are top cover future damages. Is not damage to the constitution and/or one of the amendments enough for the courts to hear a case?

This whole thing of standing is a crap line made up by lawyers to be lazy and derelict in their jobs. Just think if courts honestly heard all of the disputes after the 2020 elections. A difference would have occurred. January 6 may never have happened, along with the Russia Ukraine war, Hamas attacking Israel, the little rocket man not lobbing bombs, Iran not funding terrorists. If these things were heard and not buried in standing, the corpse most likely would not have been named president on that election result, but a different process would have occurred.

Now the supreme court is being derelict with the speech issue on regarding not looking at the government compelling social media companies to ban postings that are contrary to the governments position. Clear first amendment violation. The virus response had this pressure by government to shut down opinion different from theirs, and now we found out how wrong the government was.

Standing, courtroom censorship for the laziness of the courts! Standing is not in the constitution. You don’t have to be a lawyer to read what is not there!