How to get standing - SCOTUS tosses TX case - USA 2020 Elections: Thread

Steven Schear schear.steve at
Sat Dec 12 13:32:10 PST 2020

So let me get this straight. These so-called high powered lawyers
mis-estimated whether SCOTUS would assume Texas has standing (standing is
the first basic test to determine in a U.S. court if a plaintiff is
qualified to bring a suit). Give me a break! Only 2nd or 3rd string
constitutional lawyers could make this error.

On Sat, Dec 12, 2020, 7:36 AM Zenaan Harkness <zen at> wrote:

> On Sat, Dec 12, 2020 at 06:17:23PM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> >    Citing a lack of standing, Justice Samuel Alito wrote in a brief
> order that the state "has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest
> in the manner in which another State conducts its elections," adding "All
> other pending motions are dismissed as moot."
> >
> >    Supreme Court Tosses Texas Bid To Overturn Election
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Well, citizens of the swing states have standing, so they can file.
> >
> > Trumpers, both legal eagles and folks in their personal capacity, in the
> 4 swing states (GA, PA, WI, MI?) need to file this case from their home
> turf, as their interest is surely direct and personal - effected personally.
> >
> > I guess this is new territory for some folks...
> Once parties with sufficient standing ARE properly filed and listed, the
> Amicus Curiae 19 states can still join in support.
> Just need lots of folks WITH standing in the 4 swing states at issue -
> this is what SCOTUS implied "insufficient standing", i.e. we need folks who
> DO have standing!
> Voters in GA, PA, MI, WI, each DO have direct standing.  Folks from EACH
> of these 4 states must now file, in order to solve this technicality of
> "insufficient standing".
> Good luck from Aus!
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 2291 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the cypherpunks mailing list