As I explained in previous posts, back in 2023 the District Court combined our Missouri v. Biden case against government censorship with a similar case, Kennedy v. Biden, filed in the same court by plaintiffs Robert F. Kennedy, Jr, Children's Health Defense, and Connie Sampognaro.
In the meantime, the District Court issued a similar injunction against the government on behalf of Kennedy's case but stayed that injunction until 10 days after the Supreme Court ruled in our case.
Importantly, we believe that Kennedy will be able to pass the ridiculously high bar for standing that the Supreme Court demanded in our case.
The appeals court remanded the question back to the District Court with instructions to consider whether Kennedy met this high-standing bar set by SCOTUS. Importantly, the 5th Circuit's order also suggested that Kennedy plaintiffs may hit the stringent SCOTUS definition for standing on this issue.
Hopefully, I've explained these Byzantine legal developments sufficiently for you to follow, but in the event that you're still wondering what all this means, here's my prediction: the District Court will issue the injunction on behalf of Kennedy with an argument that he does meet SCOTUS's stringent standing requirements; the 5th Circuit will uphold this injunction on appeal; then we'll be back at the Supreme Court next year on the injunction issue.
SCOTUS will agree that, according to their own criteria, Kennedy has standing and the Supreme Court will have to consider the evidentiary record and make a ruling on the merits.
The rest of our Missouri v. Biden case is, in the meantime, moving forward with additional discovery at the District Court as we enter the trial phase.
https://brownstone.org/articles/missouri-v-biden-kennedy-v-biden-update/
No comments:
Post a Comment