- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Supreme Court votes 7-2 to KEEP Obamacare!
Posted on 6/17/21 at 11:26 am to Indefatigable
Posted on 6/17/21 at 11:26 am to Indefatigable
Thanks — so only someone who was directly “injured” by this can ask to sue?
Oh and going to find def of redressabity
Oh and going to find def of redressabity
This post was edited on 6/17/21 at 11:28 am
Posted on 6/17/21 at 11:28 am to tiger91
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.
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 on 6/17/21 at 11:30 am to tiger91
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.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News