I think that there is a good chance that SCOTUS will rule that the Pro-Prop 8 people had NO STANDING in the case.<quoted text>
Yet the SCotUS asked for discussion regarding Standing, and NOT just of Standing to Appeal. They also questioned regarding Standing to Intervene.
The issue appears to be unresolved whether Standing according to the California Constitution should carry anything other than advisory weight against Federal Rules on Standing as applied to Cases brought before ANY level of Federal Court.
As I've said, NOBODY is discussing this; and if I'M thinking it you can bet that the clerks who write preparatory and follow-up position and strategy papers for the Justices are, too.
And many of us have been claiming they had no standing in the case since the beginning, and have been arguing that these people have had no standing since DAY ONE in this case, lo, these many years.....