Key legal question
Whether the Federal Supreme Court complaint met the statutory reasoning requirements.
Extracted holding
No. The filing did not engage with the reasoning of the challenged decision and merely referred to earlier submissions, which is insufficient.
Extracted reasoning
Under Art. 42 para. 1 BGG, the complaint itself must explain which rights were violated; constitutional claims are examined only if expressly raised and reasoned under Art. 106 para. 2 BGG. A mere cross-reference to earlier briefs does not satisfy the pleading duty.