[upchuck]

In February the court dismissed our case on the grounds of standing (i.e., saying we can’t sue the President for the constitutional violations alleged, but rather should sue someone else). We are appealing immediately to the 9th Circuit.

This sounds very similar to the way SCOTUS refused to deal with President Trump's election fraud claims. Instead of hearing the claim, and potentially opening a can of very interesting worms, the court chickened out and just said, "You have no standing." What a buncha BS!

[TexasGurl24]

Standing is a fundamental requirement of Article III.

Courts were never intended to give advisory opinions.

https://cpb-us-e1.wpmucdn.com/sites.suffolk.edu/dist/3/1172/files/2015/11/Scalia_17SuffolkULRev881.pdf