Post

Because standing is an Article III requirement that the Court has to address irrespective of whether it was briefed or raised by the parties? It's quite literally an issue in every case.

ElieNYC@elienyc.bsky.social

ACB: I want to ask about standing KBJ: You all didn't breif standing. Is that an issue in this case? Translation ACB: I want to talk about my pet issue KBJ: Why? Why do we have to indulge your bullshit all the time?

16/10/26, 10:44 pm2 reposts20 likes

𝚉𝚎𝚗 𝚉𝚎𝚛𝚘☯️0️⃣

@xvf17.bsky.social

Itym every civil case. There is no such thing as standing for criminal cases is there?

Sagittarius A*

@sagastar.bsky.social

well, unless its student loans where MOHELA was contractually prohibited from suing. or if the court feels like it i mean "major question doctrine" the court doesn't have to do shit, and it shows.

E Pluribus Unum

@swampsteve.bsky.social

In theory, sure. But if a case has gotten that far and no one’s raised standing, how likely is it that there’s a real question? And if there’s a real question, wouldn’t it be better to invite supplemental briefing instead of using up argument time?

doughoff.bsky.social

@doughoff.bsky.social

Yeah, in any court, jurisdictional issues should be briefed, not just dropped in.