3 ms·
The strange thing there is that for a few decades now federal courts have required a plaintiff to have suffered some sort of injury before they can sue, and th
by anigbrowl 2y ago
The strange thing there is that for a few decades now federal courts have required a plaintiff to have suffered some sort of injury before they can sue, and the notion that a credible threat is equivalent to such injury seems to overstretch that concept.
https://harvardlawreview.org/print/vol-136/standing-in-the-way-the-courts-escalating-interference-in-federal-policymaking/#footnote-ref-16 https://harvardlawreview.org/print/vol-136/standing-in-the-w...
- avar 2y agoThe ADF compiled a short history of pre-enforcement challenges going back to the 1920s[1]. They're not common, but weren't novel in this case. 1. https://adfmedialegalfiles.blob.core.windows.net/files/PreEnforcementChallengesBackgrounder.pdf https://adfmedialegalfiles.blob.core.windows.net/files/PreEn...
- Darrengineer 2y agoAlso, the ‘credible threat’ of being prosecuted was based on the agency simply declining to state that it would not sue if Smith violated the law. Seeing as no such violation of the law had even been alleged, it seems incredibly flimsy to say there was a threat at all, let alone a credible threat.