Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Latest Breaking News

onenote

(46,148 posts)

27. No. The District Court dismissed the complaint for lack of ripeness and standing

Reply to msfiddlestix (Reply #26)

Mon Oct 2, 2023, 11:21 PM

Oct 2023

The plaintiff appealed to the 11th Circuit, which has not yet ruled on the appeal. The plaintiff then sought to have the Supreme Court bypass the 11th Circuit and grant "certiorari before judgment" -- something the Court rarely does. The Court doesn't explain when it denies certiorari and a denial of certiorari does not necessarily reflect agreement with the decision below.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

30 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

US Supreme Court rebuffs long-shot candidate's bid to disqualify Trump in 2024 [View all] mahatmakanejeeves Oct 2023 OP

Well I wonder if Democrats should file then what do they do, you know the 6 that have meet and .... turbinetree Oct 2023 #1

"Standing" is a fail safe out for subversive fascist fact-finders Ponietz Oct 2023 #2

Were you this upset when all the birther cases were tossed on standing grounds? onenote Oct 2023 #6

Enjoy your day Ponietz Oct 2023 #8

FYI Ponietz Oct 2023 #9

Of course they did - they're only sorry it failed peppertree Oct 2023 #3

It would have been 9-0 if it had gone to the full Court Polybius Oct 2023 #14

I agree Mz Pip Oct 2023 #16

The 14th doesn't mention ANYTHING about conviction however, slightlv Oct 2023 #19

Either way, there would have to be proof of tRump malfeasance. Practically, conviction is main way Bernardo de La Paz Oct 2023 #21

True, it doesn't however just claiming someone engaged in it doesn't mean they did. cstanleytech Oct 2023 #22

Who determines whether someone engaged in insurrection? NYC Liberal Oct 2023 #23

What procedure, specifically Zeitghost Oct 2023 #25

Of course they did Marthe48 Oct 2023 #4

This appeal was doomed from the start onenote Oct 2023 #5

Thank you. And good morning. NT mahatmakanejeeves Oct 2023 #7

Fair point. Now the question I have is, why did SCITUS render an opinion they chose not to hear? msfiddlestix Oct 2023 #12

They are trying to send a signal to other cases which are in the pipe. former9thward Oct 2023 #13

They didn't render an opinion.It was one in long list of cases they refused to hear onenote Oct 2023 #17

Wait. I guess I misread the report. Could have sworn SCOTUS decided the person brining the case msfiddlestix Oct 2023 #26

No. The District Court dismissed the complaint for lack of ripeness and standing onenote Oct 2023 #27

Thank you for helping me understand this better. I've heard the "certiorari" a number of times, msfiddlestix Oct 2023 #28

I think he represented himself. onenote Oct 2023 #29

Hope this puts a damper on the 14th Amendment junk. It ain't gonna work and even if Silent Type Oct 2023 #10

I'm no lawyer, but these cases seem dubious. Lonestarblue Oct 2023 #11

This should put to rest what some self-proclaimed "scholars" said was possible without a conviction Polybius Oct 2023 #15

Yep LeftInTX Oct 2023 #18

This issue melm00se Oct 2023 #20

I don't want someone to replace trump. DownriverDem Oct 2023 #24

Can we be over this already? MistakenLamb Oct 2023 #30