ud A
DisErict of Socoth
The
Distrnt Coyst dshe
t
uManibest 9 bobelle Disoeserd ofthe/ews
Exrol1ny
Bx Setern8 9 Mobios for BeliNsex, nssban bo
Wis MEsistrete Jeds is Wo/pbes of i8 U1sict.
636 CJCJ CAJ.
Tho Distnet Cout for the Dusbrt of Soubh
oud B
Caroline" MenFosh dsreserd of the Jow "bx
ufuse
adopbins Report and Recansecdetior Hat
on uis, Suprn cout Precedect set forth n
Ereer v Hewbiss Iieee
The unibod Dislrict Coust for the Disbueb of Soubb
ound C,
hes Misconstsued the Unsisnod Cowt osbor
CE6Ing
of futererce bx bhich bis cst wgs Decided
Brime
in the Dustrct Court for the Disfnic ofsoul earns
ind Tho unbet stetes . Courb of Apfeels for bho
Foustt Crcine end corstitute ? desre Pocedursl
Duk Pcecs.
GsoudD. The Distncl Coust Far the Disbnct of South Cerls
End the Cout of Apels For the Forlt Cvrcwl dupre
Pebibane ot Eishth end Fouteenh Aorndarests Rishts.
the Coet of Apperls For the Fouth Crcurt Menked
GoundE
Eolele disteserd of the lew"on the bass be Cot
of Aaseels Wee Morglly snd etbicelly bound" to seE
thuk juskick was dore"

Whether the District Court for the District of South Carolina erred in dismissing the case on the ground that the petitioners lacked standing to challenge the constitutionality of the 2020 election results in South Carolina