This case is a joke. We should stop discussing it. This will be slam dunked out of SCOTUS 9-0. They wont take the petition.
The case was filed by pro se plaintiff. His case was dismissed by the district court for lack of jurisdiction. It specifically doesn’t opine on the merits of his case. Meanwhile the petition doesn’t really address the jurisdiction issue directly, makes a poor argument for standing, and tells the court the FTCA is unconstitutional so throw it out. On the last part, I don’t think he raised this argument before. Otherwise the trial court would have addressed it, even briefly, in their order dismissing the case. And they did not.
Finally, he asks the court for relief which they could not grant. He wants SCOTUS to tell the district court to grant his claims. Uh…what? There has been no trial. That isn’t how this works. You can’t ask the court to just grant your claims. The best they could do would be to find standing as well as subject matter jurisdiction. Then remand to district court.
Basically, this case is dead as a door nail. Not going to be granted. And it shouldn’t be. The causes of action are legally specious and amplified by a lot of hyperbole instead of supported by facts. I know this because I took 30 minutes of my life I won’t be getting back to read thru the case filings. Do yourselves a favor and tune this case out…it is pretty foolish to think this is going anywhere.
You are exactly right on all points, especially on the relief requested making no sense. If Juan O Savin has been pushing it as a plausible case, it tells everyone all you need to know about the veracity of following that particular line of mis-info. Btw, it took you 30 minutes.... slow reader lol :) Issues presented gave the game away.
This case is a joke. We should stop discussing it. This will be slam dunked out of SCOTUS 9-0. They wont take the petition.
The case was filed by pro se plaintiff. His case was dismissed by the district court for lack of jurisdiction. It specifically doesn’t opine on the merits of his case. Meanwhile the petition doesn’t really address the jurisdiction issue directly, makes a poor argument for standing, and tells the court the FTCA is unconstitutional so throw it out. On the last part, I don’t think he raised this argument before. Otherwise the trial court would have addressed it, even briefly, in their order dismissing the case. And they did not.
Finally, he asks the court for relief which they could not grant. He wants SCOTUS to tell the district court to grant his claims. Uh…what? There has been no trial. That isn’t how this works. You can’t ask the court to just grant your claims. The best they could do would be to find standing as well as subject matter jurisdiction. Then remand to district court.
Basically, this case is dead as a door nail. Not going to be granted. And it shouldn’t be. The causes of action are legally specious and amplified by a lot of hyperbole instead of supported by facts. I know this because I took 30 minutes of my life I won’t be getting back to read thru the case filings. Do yourselves a favor and tune this case out…it is pretty foolish to think this is going anywhere.
You are exactly right on all points, especially on the relief requested making no sense. If Juan O Savin has been pushing it as a plausible case, it tells everyone all you need to know about the veracity of following that particular line of mis-info. Btw, it took you 30 minutes.... slow reader lol :) Issues presented gave the game away.