Started By
Message

re: Supreme Court votes 7-2 to KEEP Obamacare!

Posted on 6/17/21 at 11:26 am to
Posted by tiger91
In my own little world
Member since Nov 2005
36744 posts
Posted on 6/17/21 at 11:26 am to
Thanks — so only someone who was directly “injured” by this can ask to sue?

Oh and going to find def of redressabity
This post was edited on 6/17/21 at 11:28 am
Posted by Indefatigable
Member since Jan 2019
26653 posts
Posted on 6/17/21 at 11:28 am to
I posted this on redress in the other thread on this:

Redressability in this context basically questions whether a favorable decision by the court would actually “redress” or compensate, etc the plaintiffs injury.

Here, the court held that because the mandate was zero’d out and there is no enforcement of it, that a court decision calling it unconstitutional would not actually address the plaintiffs injury.
Posted by Indefatigable
Member since Jan 2019
26653 posts
Posted on 6/17/21 at 11:30 am to
quote:

so only someone who was directly “injured” by this can ask to sue?



That is the first element--injury in fact. The second, causation, requires that the injury be tied to an unlawful act by the other party.

SCOTUS admitted that the individual challengers had been injured in fact, however they could not tie that injury to an unlawful act on the party of the defendant states, nor would a favorable court opinion address the challenger's injury.

first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram