Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

SCOTUS 9-0: Election Day Is One Single Day. Listen to oral argument from Foster v. Love (1997)
https://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com ^ | 12.11.2020 | naturalborncitizen

Posted on 12/11/2020 12:55:02 PM PST by rxsid

SCOTUS 9-0: Election Day Is One Single Day. Listen to oral argument from Foster v. Love (1997):

If the state Legislatures would just sit down for an hour and listen to the oral argument in Foster v. Love, they would have such an easy time understanding their plenary authority was triggered at midnight after Nov. 3rd. (You may listen to the audio here.). Let’s examine some of the transcript:

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg:

“It is an election, and it seems to me, being an election it conflicts with the Federal single Election Day.”

You can’t canvass for days/weeks on end. As Justice Ginsburg said, it’s “the Federal single Election Day.” And the unanimous opinion in this case was consistent with the oral argument, holding that “the election” must be consummated on “the day”.

Justice Souter then had this heated (listen to it) exchange with the Louisiana Attorney General, who was knocked out cold at oral argument, and then lost in a 9-0 decision. That’s going to be the outcome now as well if the state Legislatures would stop being bullied by their governors, secretaries, and attorneys general, and start fighting to end the usurpation of their elector choosing plenary authority. Check it out:

AG Richard I. Ieyoub
—Louisiana could do that, Your Honor, but what we’re saying here is that Louisiana’s open primary scheme in no way really clashes or conflicts with the Federal Election Day statute.

Justice David H. Souter
Well, it does conflict, because it has an election on a day other than the day specified by the Federal statute.

That’s why we’re here.

Isn’t that a clear conflict?

AG Richard I. Ieyoub
No, Your Honor, because I believe that you can’t necessarily give a literal interpretation in this particular–

Justice David H. Souter
Why not?

AG Richard I. Ieyoub
—Well—

Justice David H. Souter
The statute’s clear.

AG Richard I. Ieyoub
—simply because I think that it might… it would lead to unreasonable–

Justice David H. Souter
What’s unreasonable about it?

Congress has decided that it wants the election to occur uniformly on a given day in November throughout the United States.

Sometimes, oral argument is not a good predictor of outcome, but looking back on this one, or rather, listening back – you really must hear this for yourselves – it was a very bad day for the Louisiana Attorney General.

State Representatives and Senators should be adopting Foster v. Love, 522 U.S. 67 (1997), in their statements to the public, and they should join this action now before the Supreme Court. The law is with you.


TOPICS: Government; History; Reference; Society
KEYWORDS: arizona; biden; donofrio; dontgiveup; election; electionfraud; elections; foster; fostervlove; georgia; love; michigan; nevergivein; nosurrender; nowhiteflag; pennsylvania; scotus; souter; supremecourt; texas; trump; wisconsin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-59 next last
To: drypowder

libtard socialists care about laws when they like the laws

libtard socialists dont care about laws when they dont like the laws


21 posted on 12/11/2020 1:20:59 PM PST by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; Not Averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: usconservative

I am not kidding myself.

But, the difference between a 5-4 and 9-0 is important. a 9-0/8-1 type decision would convince a lot of passive liberals to accept the outcome. a 5-4 would leave the decision open to the charge of partisan politics.

It does make a difference.


22 posted on 12/11/2020 1:23:38 PM PST by Fai Mao (There is no justice until PIAPPS is hanging from a gallows.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: TeddyRay
...to strip all that down in "laymen's" terms is this...

You can have "early voting" where voters submit/send/drop off their ballots prior to "election day"....so long as the vote counts are NOT made public prior to "election day."

Voting, or counting of votes PAST "election day" 12:01 am (0001) the next day is ILLEGAL per federal law && SCOTUS - 9 to 0 decision.

23 posted on 12/11/2020 1:24:33 PM PST by rxsid (HOW CAN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN'S STATUS BE "GOVERNED" BY GREAT BRITAIN? - Leo Donofrio (2009))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: bitt
Ping!

SCOTUS 9-0: Election Day Is One Single Day. Listen to oral argument from Foster v. Love (1997)

24 posted on 12/11/2020 1:26:17 PM PST by rxsid (HOW CAN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN'S STATUS BE "GOVERNED" BY GREAT BRITAIN? - Leo Donofrio (2009))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Fai Mao
We shall have to respectfully agree to disagree.

I'm in a very pessimistic mood today. I have zero patience today.

Perhaps tomorrow I'll be more in-line with your thinking.

25 posted on 12/11/2020 1:28:05 PM PST by usconservative (When The Ballot Box No Longer Counts, The Ammunition Box Does. (What's In Your Ammo Box?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

Bookmarked-—VERY compelling argument for NO post-election day votes to count!!!!!!!!!!


26 posted on 12/11/2020 1:29:34 PM PST by bantam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: usconservative

Peace FRiend. I think we agree far more than we disagree. I’d take a 5-4 and gladly. I just want more.


27 posted on 12/11/2020 1:30:34 PM PST by Fai Mao (There is no justice until PIAPPS is hanging from a gallows.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Frapster

Frapster wrote:

“Great find - it has been my opinion that SCOTUS will rule 5-4 in favor of TX or 9-0 in favor of Texas. The delay in telling the outcome today could be SCOTUS debate or, if the decision were made earlier today, government prepping and positioning for potential riots.”

Why 5-4 and 9-0?

What would prompt the 5-4?

What would prompt the 9-0?


28 posted on 12/11/2020 1:30:37 PM PST by WildHighlander57 ((WildHighlander57 retusrning after lurking since 2000))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

Late ballots a.k.a. ballots brought in at 0-dark-hundred Nov 4th.

NOT allowed, per Foster v Love.


29 posted on 12/11/2020 1:35:02 PM PST by WildHighlander57 ((WildHighlander57 retusrning after lurking since 2000))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

Can’t change the constitution by statute. You have to amend constitution if that’s not how you want it done.


30 posted on 12/11/2020 1:39:28 PM PST by Blogger (Prayers for our President, First Lady and Republic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: rxsid
This is a huge stretch, and the opinion is being taken way out of context. Louisiana was effectively holding a GENERAL ELECTION in OCTOBER. SCOTUS said you must hold the General Election on the defined day for Federal Elections. Nobody is going to argue that early voting, vote by mail, etc was or is illegal, nor that counting has to be complete by midnight. The opinion opens with the simple statement:

"Under 2 U. S. C. §§ 1 and 7, the Tuesday after the first Monday in November in an even-numbered year "is established" as the date for federal congressional elections. Louisiana's "open primary" statute provides an opportunity to fill the offices of United States Senator and Representative during the previous month, without any action to be taken on federal election day. The issue before us is whether such an ostensible election runs afoul of the federal statute. We hold that it does."

Louisiana complied with the ruling by moving it's runoff to December, after holding their General Election on the federally mandated Tuesday in November.

People should read the actual decision. It's not a complex or difficult read.

https://www.leagle.com/decision/1997589522us671584

31 posted on 12/11/2020 1:42:42 PM PST by ETCM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

The “election” of constitutional interest is Monday I believe.

The people of PA and other states just made suggestions November 3rd and the weeks before.


32 posted on 12/11/2020 1:43:02 PM PST by Brian Griffin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

Makes sense. Laws need to be followed.

Trump wins in a landslide.


33 posted on 12/11/2020 1:45:19 PM PST by kevinm13 (Manmade "Global Warming" is a HOAX! )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

The Founding Fathers envisioned legislatures doing the voting.

The legislatures now normally go along with citizen suggestions, but legislatures have the final say just in case the majority of voters in a state choose a bad dude.


34 posted on 12/11/2020 1:46:41 PM PST by Brian Griffin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

The Founding Fathers envisioned legislatures doing the voting.

The legislatures now normally go along with citizen suggestions, but legislatures have the final say just in case the majority of voters in a state choose a bad dude.


35 posted on 12/11/2020 1:46:41 PM PST by Brian Griffin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WildHighlander57
"Late ballots a.k.a. ballots brought in at 0-dark-hundred Nov 4th.

NOT allowed, per Foster v Love."

That's correct! By unanimous decision no less!!

If the defendant states can not remedy the FACT that late vote counting occurred (by new election, etc) as reported all across TV, then their already seated electors CAN NOT transmit their votes to the feds.

Nobody get's to 270 and the decision on who is the next President goes to the House where the representation from each state gets 1 vote.

Assuming the states that are majority (R) vote together for Trump, President Trump will have his 2nd consecutive term.

This appears to be the clearest path now.

36 posted on 12/11/2020 1:49:44 PM PST by rxsid (HOW CAN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN'S STATUS BE "GOVERNED" BY GREAT BRITAIN? - Leo Donofrio (2009))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: rxsid; ETCM; bitt

See etcm’s post:

https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3914566/posts?page=31#31

How does this context change things?

But IMHO, it’s still illegal to truck in ballots after the polls close.


37 posted on 12/11/2020 1:50:21 PM PST by WildHighlander57 ((WildHighlander57 retusrning after lurking since 2000))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Blogger

That’s right, and that’s what the LOVE case decided!


38 posted on 12/11/2020 1:51:05 PM PST by rxsid (HOW CAN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN'S STATUS BE "GOVERNED" BY GREAT BRITAIN? - Leo Donofrio (2009))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

Thanks for sharing this very important case.


39 posted on 12/11/2020 1:56:34 PM PST by tired&retired (Blessings )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ETCM
Your right, it's not difficult. Fully explained in #16 above.

States can NOT count, and announce the results of, ballots PAST "election day" as set forth by the Congress.

If that were permissible, then a state could continue counting ballots received a month or more after "election day." It would completely destroy our election process.

It's a slam dunk.

If the defendant states can NOT completely remove the votes counted AFTER "election day" and ONLY report votes tallied as of 11:59 on "election day," then their election results violate federal law & the LOVE 9 - 0 decision.

40 posted on 12/11/2020 1:57:45 PM PST by rxsid (HOW CAN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN'S STATUS BE "GOVERNED" BY GREAT BRITAIN? - Leo Donofrio (2009))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-59 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson