Frens, this will go nowhere. I keep seeing this all over the boards. For the SCOTUS to take on a case it must be established in the writ the lower courts erred in their decision. This filing does not do that, it will get tossed. It's an individual, not a lawyer, who is doing this, so he doesn't understand how to argue the facts and present evidence of a lower court erring. The grammar is horrible as well for court filings. Unbelievable this keeps getting posted!
Frens, this will go nowhere. I keep seeing this all over the boards. For the SCOTUS to take on a case it must be established in the writ the lower courts erred in their decision. This filing does not do that, it will get tossed. It's an individual, not a lawyer, who is doing this, so he doesn't understand how to argue the facts and present evidence of a lower court erring. The grammar is horrible as well for court filings. Unbelievable this keeps getting posted!
It's a good point. The Supreme Court often rejects things for technical or procedural reasons, but people assume they are refusing to hear the issue.
If the lower court made the decision to dismiss the case, that is clearly an error.
Paralegal here, and you are incorrect. Dismissing the case is not an error on that basis alone.
Can We The People sign on as in a class action suit…?