If the Supreme Court can absurdly determine that those who worked to pass Prop 8 in California, and then fought their State all the way to the Supreme Court when their corrupt government refused to abide by Prop 8 (rolled over in the face of legal challenge), didn’t have standing, I’m sure they will come up with a theory here as well. (By the way, by that absurd reasoning the Supreme Court pretty much killed off the value of initiative nation-wide, since the whole point of initiative is direct action by the people when their government refuses to act.)
Not to mention this is the same court that ruled Obamacare was unconstitutional because it was beyond Congress’ powers, and then immediately said it could still enforce this unconstitutional law through a system of “taxes.” (Ignoring the unconstitutional conditions doctrine—the legislature may not do indirectly what it cannot do directly.) And it also didn’t deal with the problem that the “tax” is unlawful because the tax provisions arose in the Senate, not the House. (The challenge to that portion of Obamacare is still being fought in the D.C. Circuit by Pacific Legal Foundation.)
You’re right. I’ve had no confidence in the courts for the last few years at least. Nothing that matters is anybody’s “business”, according to their rulings on standing in critical cases. This man has standing. Whether the courts will recognize that standing is a whole ‘nother story, as you correctly note. Right now we are basically functioning without a Constitution because our courts are so compromised.
Wasn’t there a report that the NSA had tapped the phones and emails of nearly all the judges in California? I wonder what the reasoning was...