UFC fans (me included) can breathe a huge sigh of relief as sanity prevails in DDC, where a judge allowed the fights to continue. This case presented absurd aesthetic standing theories that left Judge Mehta no choice but to deny TRO. Let’s break down precisely how absurd it was.
https://twitter.com/aagshumate/status/2065486334089638273
To get into court in the first place a Plaintiff must show they’re injured by what’s happened. Here the claim was an aesthetic injury that viewing the structures associated with the UFC event will diminish their personal enjoyment of the WH and Lincoln Memorial.
Aesthetic injury can be enough for standing (though it probably shouldn’t). But this was too much for Judge Mehta as he held that incidentally viewing something unpleasant without more is not enough to establish standing.
Plaintiffs also claimed physical harms because the road closures associated with the event will have a negative impact on their existing injuries. Though it may sound like I am making this up, that is what was alleged. Judge Mehta easily disposed of that one.
Finally the judge noted that there was no irreparable harm because plaintiffs waited months before filing the case even though they knew about this event. In addition the public interest weighed in favor of the event as there was tons of time and money spent to put on the event.
Credit to Judge Mehta for denying relief. But it raises how plaintiffs are stretching aesthetic standing to ridiculous levels and perhaps it’s time to do away with it. It shouldn’t be the case that a Plaintiff can stop a government project because they don’t like how it looks.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
