Alabama Lawyer's Lawsuit Against Pro-Gay Supreme Court Justices

File: alabama.jpg (14KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 225x225px

http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2017/07/appeals_court_rules_against_be.html

The U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday stated in an opinion that lawyer Austin Burdick did not demonstrate actual or imminent concrete injury to himself.

"And even if Burdick had a legally protected interest in winning his constitutional arguments -- and plainly he did not -- the district court did not err in concluding that Burdick's allegations are "vague," "abstract assertion[s]" that were insufficient to establish a concrete injury," according to the opinion issued by a three-judge panel of the appeals court - Circuit Judges Tjoflat, Stanley Marcus, and William Pryor.

U.S. District Court Judge Madeline Haikala on Oct. 26, 2016 also tossed out the lawsuit based on judicial immunity. The 11th Circuit did not address the immunity issue since it had declared the lawsuit should have been tossed out on the other issues.

Burdick filed the lawsuit in February 2016 against the five U.S. Supreme Court justices - Anthony M. Kennedy, Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kegan - who made up the 5-4 majority in Obergefell.

In his lawsuit, Burdick had argued that in their decision in the Obergefell case declaring same-sex marriage legal that the justices went "beyond a manipulation, twist, strain, or unique perspective on the text and crosses over in to an abandonment of the Constitution."

The lawsuit cited the five justices for violations of the 5th Amendment, breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty and sought damages exceeding $6 million.