🤔⚖️🏛 The Truth About the Brunson Case 🤔⚖️🏛
(www.uncoverdc.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (87)
sorted by:
Another thing that makes no sense....when the SC dismissed the Texas v. PA case based on "standing", which is as transparently corrupt a reason as it gets, IMHO. Texas, as well as all the others who joined the case, certainly DID have standing to bring the case. Could the real reason be that the timing wasn't right to rule on the merits?
All the cases that have failed as a result of 'lack of standing', isn't it time to ask SCOTUS 'then what and who does have standing?
Without the current level of PAIN that ALL are experiencing, We would have WON the battle but lost the WAR because the next election would have been tightened up and the Fake News would have the TRUMPET.
Yes, it was a bogus dismissal for “standing.” But that case isn’t comparable to this Brunson case. The TX v PA case was an original jurisdiction case. State v. State can go straight to SCOTUS under article III. SCOTUS can rule on the merits in an original jurisdiction case.
Basically the SC punted and argued it was a State right issue. But you bring up a fair point that when there are disputes between States that is when the SC has to step in and NOT punt.