That is a blatant lie.
The lower courts dismissed the case, and the plaintiffs appealed the case.
That is normal procedure.
Now, the Supreme Court will refuse to hear the case, which is what is up next.
I suspect the plaintiffs will come up with some weird excuse as to why the Supreme Court will do exactly what is expected with a case argued by people who have no clue about what they are attempting to do.
What do you think the outcome will be?
The courts always run out the clock. That’s what they were going to do here.
They found a national emergency statute and filed with that. The USSC attorney contacted them and asked them to include more documentation.
See ya on January 6th, but I’m sure you’ll still be blowhard when you are wrong.
You are not quite right either, it was appealed from a lower court ruling where is got stuck in the appeals court for months. Rule 11 was discovered by Loy’s brother, which allowed the case to be submitted to the U.S.S.C. even though the lower appeals court had not yet rendered a ruling, when the case involves a National Emergency.
Thanks for calling the liars to task.
You are correct. I don’t know why people keep posting this nonsense.
In that case, why would the Clerk of the Court bother with all this?
September 23, 2022 Petition for Writ of Certiorari Received (The SCOTUS received the petition along with the copies for the Justices.) |
September 28, 2022 A phone call from SCOTUS (The Clerk of the SCOTUS calls Raland requesting for a revision of the Petition that would include more information on the lawsuit and wondering how soon they could get it.) |
October 17, 2022 2nd phone call from SCOTUS (The Clerk of the SCOTUS calls Raland again. She asks "how are you doing on your revision of the Writ with the additional information that we need?" Raland said "We're working on it as we speak!" She said "how soon can we get it?" Raland said "Right away!") |
October 20, 2022 Revised Petition shipped to the SCOTUS |
October 24, 2022 Petition docketed! (The clerk of the Court tells Raland that they have everything they need. The U.S. Attorneys have until Nov 23, 2022 to respond showing why the Supreme Court of the United States should not move on this case.) |
November 23, 2022 The Solicitor General of the United States Department of Justice replaces the U.S. Attorneys (Elizabeth B. Prelogar, the Solicitor General of United States, the official attorney on record for the defendants, and in behalf of the 388 defendants, waived their right to respond to this lawsuit, thus allowing the SCOTUS to move forward!) |
November 30, 2022 The SCOTUS set the conference date for Jan 6, 2023 (The 9 Justices will meet January 6, 2023 to discuss the case and decide (by vote) if they want to move it to a hearing, where they will oficially judge the case and decide (by vote) if defendants should be removed from office) |
You don't know about Rule 11?
They used the Court's own Rule 11 to bypass the 10th Circuit
who had been sitting on the case for months.
I suggest you better familiarize yourself with the case before opining.
Does the Supreme Court routinely contact plaintiffs by phone and coach and encourage to expidite filing to make deadline ASAP???
Listen to (search) interview Sarah Westall Brunson