February 11, 2017 · 7 Comments
US Government (ECWd) –
After finding glaring omissions in the recent opinion from the 9th Circuit, coupled with the fact the Chief Judge is taking steps to possibly have the full court review the matter, we dug a little deeper to see if we could find other irregularities.
What was the “Obama” administration’s position on “standing” in the case of Spokeo Inc. v. Robins? Reading the government’s “BRIEF FOR THE UNITED STATES AS AMICUS CURIAE SUPPORTING RESPONDENT”, and comparing case law used in that case with the recent ruling out of the 9th Circuit I think we have found something.
The 9th Circuit was overturned by the US Supreme Court on a 6-2 vote in the Spokeo case, which points to a ruling far from ideological or along any claimed party line. Or in other words, they ruled on good law. In today’s heated political environment, that vote tally is important as it tends to separate the political emotions running wild and out of check, on both sides of the isle in my opinion.
In the Government’s Spokeo brief they referenced three cases of interest in our review. (Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife- 1992, Massachusetts v. EPA- 2007, and In Zivotofsky v. Secretary of State-2012)
Keep in mind, the US Government’s support of the 9th Circuit in the Spokeo case failed and was overturned in 2016, making 2016 the most recent case law on the matter as it relates to standing.
So fast forward to the current case and what do we see in the 9th Circuit’s opinion? The very same case references presented by the prior administration in the Spokeo case, which was overturned by SCOTUS. In addition, it’s what we don’t see that concerns us. There is no mention of Spokeo as we pointed out in our previous article here.
I find it very odd, as mentioned in the previous article, that the 9th Circuit made no mention of Spokeo, the most current case law, especially since that case law came from a 9th Circuit case that was overturned. Even more concerning was their reliance on those three cases all while knowing those cases were part of the Spokeo case.
Spokeo is the most recent case law and it was ignored. That should concern everyone that understands the importance of the rule of law.
I am going to go out on a limb and predicting this is one of the key reasons the Cheif Judge filed a sa sponte request. The Chief Judge knows Spokeo is the most recent case law and for the 9th circuit to ignore that case law, which came out of a case in their district, indicates to us the Spokeo is the game changer when it comes to standing in this case.
Time will tell!
Please consider a donation to the Edgar County Watchdogs.
By Kirk Allen
Readers Comments (7)