Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States

Ex parte Lévitt

58 S. Ct. 1

Type: Opinion
Court: Supreme Court of the United States
Jurisdiction: Federal
Date: 1937-10-11
Topic: general

holding petitioner lacked standing to challenge Justice Black’s appointment to the United States Supreme Court because he had no personal interest different from that in common with the public | suit contending that Justice Black’s appointment to the Supreme Court violated the Ineligibility Clause, Art. I, § 6, cl. 2

Citator

Cited by: 35 opinions

Motion for leave to file a petition for an order requiring Mr. Justice Black to show cause why he should be permitted to serve as an Associate Justice of this Court.

Per Curiam:

The grounds of this motion are that the .appointment of Mr. Justice Black by the President and the confirmation thereof by the Senate of the United States were null and void by reason of his ineligibility under Article I, Section 6, Clause 2, of the Constitution of the United States, and because there was *634 no vacancy for which the appointment could lawfully be made. The motion papers disclose no interest upon the part of the petitioner other than that of a citizen and a member of the bar of this Court. That is insufficient. It is an established principle that to entitle a private individual to invoke the judicial power to determine the validity of executive or legislative action he. must show that he has sustained or is immediately in danger of sustaining a direct injury as the result of that action and it is not sufficient that he has merely a general interest common to all members of the public. Tyler v. Judges, 179 U. S. 405, 406; Southern Ry. Co. v. King, 217 U. S. 524, 534; Newman v. Frizzell, 238 U. S. 537, 549, 550; Fairchild v. Hughes, 258 U. S. 126, 129; Massachusetts v. Mellon, 262 U. S. 447, 488. The motion is denied.

Mr. Albert Lévitt, pro se.