Hi, Shrewd!        Login  
Shrewd'm.com 
A merry & shrewd investing community
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd
Search
Shrewd'm.com Merry shrewd investors
Search
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd


The week's question
In December 2024, in the thread "Re: BRK: Why Not XOM?", BreckHutHigh asked the members: "What about the long road trips with kids?" This week it is put to everyone again. The button below opens the small thread re-asking it - read what others have said so far, then give your own answer as an ordinary reply.
Answer this questionContinue to Shrewd'mThis note won't appear again
Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (60) |
Author: albaby1 SILVER
SHREWD
  😊 😞

Number: of 84351 
Subject: Re: Colorado Gift
Date: 12/21/23 1:08 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
No. of Recommendations: 1
Though albaby brought up another point...does SCOTUS even have jurisdiction? He said that how elections are handled is a state matter. So is this even appropriate for a federal court? They already hit the highest state court in Colorado.

Yes, they'll have jurisdiction - because there now exists a live federal "case or controversy" between the parties over the propriety of the Colorado decision.

Let me illustrate by way of an absurd example. Suppose there's a federal law that requires the President to keep a jar of jellybeans on the Resolute Desk under certain circumstances. I, as a random citizen, have no standing to bring a lawsuit to enforce that law if Biden fails to keep a jar of jellybeans on his desk when I think those circumstances have been met. I have no interest or injury at stake to be resolved by a court.

But suppose a federal court lets me file anyway, and issues an order forcing Biden to put jellybeans on his desk. Unlike the initial situation, where I had no actual interest or injury in the case, the analysis turns to whether Biden has an interest or injury in the outcome of that decision. And he clearly does. Biden's interests are concrete, specific to him, and require him (as the aggrieved party) to take an action. So now there is an interest or injury that a party can allege to invoke the jurisdiction of the court.
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
Print the post
Members reply directly to albaby1 here — and replies get answered. Reading is free; so is joining the conversation. Join Shrewd'm »
This community has written 84,309 posts about US Policy. The article-length ones it recommended most:
It's going to get worse · 33 recs · 2025
G’day Donny · 30 recs · 2026
Old Related Story · 28 recs · 2026
HCR is a national treasure · 27 recs · 2025
Fascism in America · 27 recs · 2025
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (60) |


Announcements
US Policy FAQ
Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

Best Of Politics | Best Of | Favourites & Replies | All Boards | Followed Shrewds | Open Questions | Moving a community