|
|
|
|
|
by PuppyTailWags
1244 days ago
|
|
Here's the thing though, both of these cases have no reason to be brought to SCOTUS because it fails to show aggrieved party or harm done. In the NY case, the law itself was already moot, and therefore the case should've been dismissed. In the EPA case, there was could be no harm done, because no regulation had passed. By this logic I should have a legal right to sue anyone due to a potential violation of any civil liberty without first proving any actual violation whatsoever... which is clearly nonsense. SCOTUS took up both these cases for clearly political reasons as opposed to good law. |
|