Don’t panic! This is all complete bulls~~~. It is merely political theater that the local libtard governments of New York, San Fran and Phillie are feeding to their idiot libtard followers. They are doing this KNOWING such lawsuits will go nowhere and accomplish nothing but wasting money. This lawsuit is the very definition of a “frivolous”. It is only being done to waste money and give the local lib politicians a chance to beat their chests. For those interested in the specifics I’ll explain below the article.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/cities-suing-department-of-defense-background-checks_us_5a42a0fce4b06d1621b5b584?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009
Why can’t this go anywhere? Three reasons: (I’ll keep it simple)
a) The Pentagon as an Agency of the Federal Government is immune to the suit. Under United States law, the federal government as well as state and tribal governments generally enjoy sovereign immunity, also known as governmental immunity, from lawsuits. The principle of sovereign immunity in US law was inherited from the English common law legal maxim rex non potest peccare, meaning “the king can do no wrong.” In some situations, sovereign immunity may been waived by law. Sovereign immunity falls into two categories:
Absolute immunity: When absolute immunity applies a government actor may not be sued for the allegedly wrongful act, even if that person acted maliciously or in bad faith; and Qualified immunity: When qualified immunity applies the government actor is shielded from liability only if specific conditions are met, as specified in statute or case law.
Absolute immunity applies to acts that, if subject to challenge, would significantly affect the operation of government, such as would occur if a legislator could be sued for core legislative acts, and is also typically extended to statements made on the floor of the legislature. Similar protections apply to judges who are acting in a judicial capacity.
The United States has waived sovereign immunity to a limited extent through the Federal Tort Claims Act, which waives the immunity if a tortious act of a federal employee causes damage, and the Tucker Act, which waives the immunity over claims arising out of contracts to which the federal government is a party. The Federal Tort Claims Act and the Tucker Act are not the broad waivers of sovereign immunity they might appear to be, as there are a number of statutory exceptions and judicially fashioned limiting doctrines applicable to both. Title 28 U.S.C. § 1331 confers federal question jurisdiction on district courts, but this statute has been held not to be a blanket waiver of sovereign immunity on the part of the federal government.
b) The suit is based upon a theory of negligence on the part of federal employees. Under a negligence theory of liability the “Act” of the federal employees (Failing to report) MUST be the proximate cause of the harm complained of–as the bolded language above illustrates. Thus BUT FOR failing to report the criminal history of the guy in Texas who shot up the church HE WOULD NOT have done so—Good luck with that silly argument.
c) finally the plaintiffs (NY, San Fran, Philly) do not have “standing” to bring the suit in the first place. Standing, sometimes referred to as standing to sue, is the name of the federal law doctrine that focuses on whether a prospective plaintiff can show that some personal legal interest has been invaded by the defendant. It is not enough that a person is merely interested as a member of the general public in the resolution of the dispute. The person must have a personal stake in the outcome of the controversy.
The standing doctrine is derived from the U.S. Constitution’s Article III provision that federal courts have the power to hear “cases” arising under federal law and “controversies” involving certain types of parties. In the most fundamental application of the philosophy of judicial restraint, the U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted this language to forbid the rendering of advisory opinions.
So the event happened in Texas—and does not involve any citizens or government/municipal entities in NY San Fran or Philly—sorry no standing guys case dismissed.
Now these libtards KNOW what I’ve outlined above–and they know this suit isn’t going anywhere except the trash can; but it is still going to be touted to the people in these cities as “REAL” action and of course its going to cost LOTS $$$. But do the people there know or care? Nope.
Stargazer 2 years, 1 month ago.
