Someone had left the TV on, and legal pundits were on the air.
Way before dawn, I was hearing the word, ‘standing.’ They were talking about ‘legal standing’.
And I’m recalling, years ago, a judge deciding that a plaintiff had no standing, in a court case that I happened to be observing, at the time. So the word was familiar to me.
The pundits were weighing in on former President Trump having a considerable number of top secret documents in desk drawers, and elsewhere, at his Mar-a-Lago residence, in Florida… sensitive, classified documents he apparently wasn’t supposed to have in his possession. Most especially when he was no longer serving as the nation’s president.
Such documents aren’t considered a president’s personal keepsakes. Actually, if I’ve got this right, they belong to the nation, the United States of America.
But folks in Mr. Trump’s orbit, his lawyers, in particular, might be disputing that.
And according to the commentators on TV, the former POTUS and his associates may find they have no standing, in this matter.
So, imagine that. A judge’s decision on Mr. Trump’s case could wind up being about the same as the judge’s decision I was recalling, from years ago.
The plaintiff, in a small, county courtroom, that day, was upset and saddened by the judge’s ruling. But the judge took the time to fully explain her decision… all the reasons why the plaintiff had no standing, in the legal matter.
This particular case was small potatoes, compared to the legal situation involving the former president and his lawyers.
But that word, ‘standing,’ stood out, once again… way before the crack of dawn, because someone had forgotten to turn off the TV.