What is this "Standing" Business?

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeal heard oral arguments in the Prop. 8 case yesterday.  If you heard or read any of the news reports, you likely heard about the issue of "standing."  In a case that raises big meaty constitutional, philosophical, and moral issues surrounding marriage--same-sex marriage in particular--you might be surprised that the key issue appears to be basically procedural.

So what is this whole "standing" thing, anyway?  Basically, "standing" means that a party to a law suit actually has an interest in the controversy; i.e. they actually suffered an injury because of another party's action.  It's not enough to simply not like something, or to simply be offended by something someone else does.  You have to actually be injured in some way.

Why does this matter?  At the top, it's about practicality.  Lawsuits consume a lot of time, energy, and money--none of which are limitless--so the legal system has to create some method of limiting the number of potential lawsuits.  If we could all sue anyone simply because we didn't like what they were doing, the courts would be even more backlogged than they already are.  The important cases would get lost in the mess; collective injustice being the result because the courts' ability to redress genuine wrongs would be essentially nonexistent.

That would be bad enough on its own, but there is a deeper issue at work as well.  Standing is also about liberty.  If everyone could sue without showing standing--proving they suffered a real injury--then no one could live freely.  Your personal liberty should not be curtailed unless the exercise of that liberty harms others.

Consider the standing issue in the Prop. 8 appeal.  Supporters of Prop. 8 brought suit to keep same-sex couples from marrying.  The court wants to know how same sex marriage actually harms anyone?  Clearly, if there is a fundamental right to marry that the people of California cannot deny same-sex couples, those same-sex couples are injured by Prop. 8's enforcement.  The same cannot be said of people who oppose same-sex marriage.  Sure, they may not approve but that is thin ice in terms of injury.  Essentially, the court is asking Prop. 8 defenders, "where's the beef?"

Jury Duty Pt. 2: Criminal Court Brings Out the Characters

Lexpat Unlimited now has an RSS feed!  Click on the "Subscribe" button on the right.

Jury duty rolls on (though I think I may be done sooner than anticipated).  Like I said before, no talking about the case.  But the Hall of Justice has some serious characters in its halls.

I've seen this guy several times waiting on one of the benches outside the courtroom.  With hair like this, I can only guess he's a defense attorney.

This guy was shaving in the bathroom one morning.  His friend was telling him about how he'd gotten rid of things when the cops came.

Jury Duty Pt. 1

I am currently a proud member of a California Superior Court jury!  Jury selection actually took three days and, since I was the very first person called, I had the privilege of sitting through every single question asked of every single potential juror.

Portrait of the Artist Over Three Days of Jury Selection

Of course, since I can't discuss the case, I won't be able to post anything about the trial itself.  But I am in the criminal court building all day, so there's plenty of other material to come.