That’s just how legal cases work… if you sue a state, it’s documented in court records as a suit against the sitting governor. If the governor changes, the title of the suit changes.
Same thing here with the president. It doesn’t matter who wins the election… any ongoing court cases are now against the new chief executive of the government.
Is that true? This case was Arizona v. Navajo Nation, which was consolidated with Department of the Interior v. Navajo Nation. These cases were brought by the government, not by the Navajo, but if they were, this case would have still been Navajo Nation v. Arizona. Is the respondent/defendent not the same as who the case is “against?”
That’s just how legal cases work… if you sue a state, it’s documented in court records as a suit against the sitting governor. If the governor changes, the title of the suit changes.
Same thing here with the president. It doesn’t matter who wins the election… any ongoing court cases are now against the new chief executive of the government.
Is that true? This case was Arizona v. Navajo Nation, which was consolidated with Department of the Interior v. Navajo Nation. These cases were brought by the government, not by the Navajo, but if they were, this case would have still been Navajo Nation v. Arizona. Is the respondent/defendent not the same as who the case is “against?”