Lawsuit's merits deserve to be heard

This week brought to an end Round One in a lawsuit filed against Gov. Bob Holden seeking to overturn his executive order instituting collective bargaining.

Cole County Circuit Judge Tom Brown granted the motion filed by Attorney General Jay Nixon to dismiss the lawsuit, which was filed by Senate President Pro Tem Peter Kinder of Cape Girardeau, a Republican, plus a Democratic House member and a host of statewide organizations and aggrieved state employees. Kinder and the other plaintiffs immediately indicated their intention to appeal.

Without citing evidence, legal precedent, applicable law or even reasoning, Judge Brown simply declared that the plaintiffs lack the legal standing to be in court bringing their case.

The issue of standing is what lawyers call a threshold issue, meaning that if a person bringing suit lacks standing, he or she won't get across the threshold and into court to pursue the substantive merits of the claim.

We believe Judge Brown is wrong on this crucial point. If lawmakers lack standing to challenge an executive order that man regard as a threat to the constitutional separation of powers, who does possess standing?

If a taxpayer lacks standing to challenge such a far-reaching order simply by virtue of being a taxpayer, who does possess it?

If aggrieved state employees lack legal standing to challenge an order they believe is a grave threat to their rights in the workplace, who could ever do so?

If business and municipal associations, representing thousands of companies and hundreds of thousands of employees who are Missouri citizens, lack legal standing to challenge Holden's rule by decree, then who does have the requisite standing to get into court?

Put another way: Do taxpaying Missourians have access to the courts, or don't they?

The merits of this case deserve to be heard.