435
Comments (85)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
14
thelastlast 14 points ago +14 / -0

hm. well that's not a bad point about referencing all of Article III.

but they specifically referenced it as a reason they didn't have standing. which is the mind-boggling opposite of what it says in Section 2.

but I dont know I will take any explanation for that truly bizarre ruling.

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0