Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Atticus

(15,124 posts)
Mon Sep 23, 2019, 06:41 PM Sep 2019

To those with experience in federal litigation: would an ordinary US citizen have standing to

pursue a Writ of Mandamus directed to the DNI regarding his refusal to deliver the "credible, urgent" whistle blower complaint to Congress? The statute says that he "shall" deliver it. Is that not a "nondiscretionary duty?"

3 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
To those with experience in federal litigation: would an ordinary US citizen have standing to (Original Post) Atticus Sep 2019 OP
No. former9thward Sep 2019 #1
Great question! StarfishSaver Sep 2019 #2
I heard several months ago the IRS shall doc03 Sep 2019 #3
 

StarfishSaver

(18,486 posts)
2. Great question!
Mon Sep 23, 2019, 06:49 PM
Sep 2019

Probably not. The appropriate party, as former9thward noted above, is Congress since they are the direct beneficiary of the pertinent portion of the Whistleblower statute. Although Congress represents the citizens, an individual citizen's interest is too far removed for them to claim standing.

To obtain judicial relief, any plaintiff must first surmount the standing barrier. Standing is a judicial doctrine that seeks to determine whether the plaintiff is the appropriate party to request adjudication of a particular issue.'

Standing has traditionally required that a plaintiff seeking relief have "such
a personal stake in the outcome of the controversy as to assure that concrete
adverseness which sharpens the presentation of issues upon which the court so largely depends .... ", Courts have historically found little difficulty with plaintiffs who assert a direct economic or personal injury.' However, if the plaintiff seeks to redress a personal stake of another nature the standing doctrine then becomes an amorphous concept.' An ideological plaintiff who seeks neither damages for wrongs to his personal interests nor injunctive relief for personal benefit, but who instead seeks an order compelling administrative action, is
certain to confront the standing barrier. https://www.uakron.edu/dotAsset/24c1be43-1c6a-49f2-899f-d03fac60cd30.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjLuIGZgujkAhVQqJ4KHQaACVsQFjALegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw1eDWBFYwbTi74VFBqff6NE


doc03

(35,382 posts)
3. I heard several months ago the IRS shall
Mon Sep 23, 2019, 06:49 PM
Sep 2019

supply the Congress with Trump's tax returns. It didn't happen. I have been hearing for months that the state of New York would get his tax returns. So with this president shall means unless he doesn't want to.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»To those with experience ...