From micky@21:1/5 to All on Tue Sep 6 22:56:13 2022
The news event that atarted all this abortion todo was a law in texas
giving anyone the right to sue anyone who had or did an abortion.
A) why wasn't the law enjoined like any other law seems to be when
plaintiffs make out even a moderately good case against it.
Instead it was allowed to stay in effect until the recent abortion
decision, as if that makes it moot, but it doesn't.
So, what happened to that case? Shouldn't it have been decided by now? Unrelated to abortion, the notion that anyone can sue anyone else for
violating a law, whichever, whatever law, seems to me contrary to
established law. If someone makes a campfire in the park, damaging the
grass etc, I can't sure him for damages, becdause I have no special
interest in the park, any more than anyone else.
I have no standing, but I bet they could pass a law saying I have
standing . But, woudln't I still have to have a greater interest than
just being one person who might use the park? I thought that was an established principle.
Not only is this a reason to invalidate that texas law, it's a reason it
should have been enjoined when the first suit against it was filed.
And that it wasn't is the reason I can no longer trust the current
majority of the USSC. I don't know if I've posted them yet, but some of
my posts defend parts of their anti-abortion decision that others think
are wrong. But they have discredited themselves by letting this anyone-can-sue law remain in effect.
I think you can tell, but just to be sure:
I am not a lawyer.