Skip to main content

View Diary: SCOTUS Justice Kagan Ridicules Roberts Court's "Make-Believe" Problems (63 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Well, I partially agree with you. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lujane
    Kagan argued that the SCoTUS decision should never apply again where, as was correct, an offer of complete relief, not rejected, did not render plaintiff's claim moot.  Presumably other attorneys, better than the ones representing Symczyk, will avoid waiving the issue going forward, and on that basis alone, they would circumvent this decision.
    Yeah, I concur.
    But this still leaves the question of whether the remaining potential litigants' claims, which were not moot per the FSLA, should have been deemed to be moot by the court just because the original litigant's claims were deemed to be moot.  Kagan argued they were not.  Her view, not the Court's, preserves the original intent of Congress in passing the FSLA.
    I disagree with this.  You can't evaluate things based on "potential litigants." There have to be people with real interests... a case with no remaining actual plaintiffs is dead.  No one was foreclosed by this decision... if actual people with actual injuries come forward, they can file their own case.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site