Yes - this judge is a Clinton appointee (if what I remember reading is correct).
But exactly what authority does this judge have to block certification of election results? It is one thing to issue an injunction against implementation of a law, but to block certification?
The absolute ONLY reason a judge could possibly have jurisdiction over the certification of election results is if there are questions about the voting itself (massive evidence of widespread voter fraud being a good example). Block the certification of the process was faulty. But this judge is WAY out of line blocking certification of this measure - there are no questions of the integrity of the vote itself.
OK and TX need to join up and both press forward a bill in their state legislatures taking steps to leave the Union. Several other states should join in with them... but don’t have the backbone in their legislatures... but OK and TX just might.
Exactly. The Secretary of State in OK needs to ignore the stay, certify the results and tell this judge, "Lady, I don't work for you."