[Legislurker]

[ QUOTE ]
There are a lot of cases about associational standing. It is not dependent upon members joining a suit as plaintiffs.

However, that makes no difference here. iMEGA has only "secret" members. Unless or until it discloses them and offers something more than a conclusory "certification" by its President (which I did not read admittedly), iMEGA will NOT convince a Judge that injury in fact is shown or that there is a legally protected interest present in this case. These are big hurdles for this case, apart from whatever other caselaw you may see cited.

To use a poker analogy, whether at the standing stage or at the time it claims irreparable injury (on its request for injunctive relief), iMEGA WILL have to turn its membership cards face up or the pot will go to DOJ. DOJ is not folding, so there will be a showdown on that information.

THAT being the case, iMEGA should have obtained some willing and clean individual plaintiffs from the beginning. It may never get to the merits of its equitable requests and may lose NOW, on the Motion to Dismiss, as a result of not doing so. (I am sympathetic, but skeptical of its chances at this stage, I still would say less than 5%.)

I have no knowledge of iMEGA actual membership. I know that the litigation has been discussed here in Costa Rica. I also know that the PPA declined involvement in the lawsuit.

[/ QUOTE ]

So Pappas already lied?

I have not heard from anyone involved with the IMEGA lawsuit. I would welcome their thoughts on why/how the PPA should/could become involved. Feel free to contact me at email@pokerplayersalliance.org.