As already noted, on June 13 the U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion in FDA v Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, cutting back on standing for associations that say they have standing because the government policy they are opposing causes them to spend more money.

The very next day, June 14, Tennessee filed a notice of supplemental authority in Ashe v Hargett, m.d., 3:23cv-1256.  This is the lawsuit filed by voting rights organizations against the Tennessee law that requires signs on primary day at the polls, warning voters they must not choose the primary ballot of a party they aren’t loyal to.  The notice of Supplemental Authority filed by the state argues that this case must be dismissed because the plaintiffs don’t have standing.

Even though No Labels is no longer running a presidential nominee, it is still in court in two cases that it had filed before it decided not to run a candidate.  In Arizona, the lawsuit over whether No Labels could block candidates for Congress and state office is pending in the Ninth Circuit.  The No Labels response is due July 22.

In Delaware, its trademark lawsuit will have a trial starting May 19, 2025.  It had sued a parody site called “No Labels.com.”

On June 10, the Nevada Democratic Party filed a lawsuit in state court against the Secretary of State and the Green Party, alleging that the Secretary of State should not have approved the Green Party’s petition because it doesn’t have enough valid signatures.  Nevada State Democratic Party v Nevada Green Party, first  judicial district court, 24OC-00107.

However, when the Democratic Party filed the lawsuit, it did not have the complete list of petition signers.  The Secretary of State had only given the Democratic Party a partial list of the signers.