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 1-2021-4041-59 next last

1 posted on 12/11/2020 12:55:02 PM PST by rxsid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: LucyT
PING!

Look who's baaaacckk.

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

2 posted on 12/11/2020 12:55:54 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 1 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

Where is the link to listen?

Here is one

https://www.oyez.org/cases/1997/96-670


3 posted on 12/11/2020 12:56:52 PM PST by RummyChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

oh I see it in the info. i only skim articles. I need to see it fast.


4 posted on 12/11/2020 12:57:41 PM PST by RummyChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

Would this void all the early voting going on everywhere? Seems like it should.,.,


5 posted on 12/11/2020 12:58:46 PM PST by TeddyRay ( I am a Chump 4 Trump)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick
"Where is the link to listen?"

It's linked, twice, in the posted story. Look for the words "here" and "listen" that are linked.

6 posted on 12/11/2020 12:59:05 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 3 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

:)


7 posted on 12/11/2020 12:59:18 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 4 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

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.


8 posted on 12/11/2020 1:01:08 PM PST by Frapster (Don't tread on me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

Oh, this is delicious.


9 posted on 12/11/2020 1:01:57 PM PST by Fai Mao (There is no justice until PIAPPS is hanging from a gallows.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Frapster

I want a 9-0 in favor. But, a 7-2 or 8-1 would be good too. 5-4 is civil war.


10 posted on 12/11/2020 1:03:41 PM PST by Fai Mao (There is no justice until PIAPPS is hanging from a gallows.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Fai Mao

I think they have to go 9-0 for the reasons you stated. 5-4 or cased denial will tip the scales for sure.


11 posted on 12/11/2020 1:05:52 PM PST by Frapster (Don't tread on me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

Won’t the defense simply argue that the votes were cast on (or before) election day, but only that the administrative act of counting the votes wasn’t completed on that day?


12 posted on 12/11/2020 1:06:54 PM PST by Jim Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fai Mao
5-4 is civil war.

We may have to live with that, particularly with this court. As it is, anything else would be just delaying the inevitable.

13 posted on 12/11/2020 1:07:32 PM PST by CatOwner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

14 posted on 12/11/2020 1:08:23 PM PST by ClearCase_guy (If White Privilege is real, why did Elizabeth Warren lie about being an Indian?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

Excellent find. Was this case cited in the Texas brief?


15 posted on 12/11/2020 1:13:04 PM PST by jersey117
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TeddyRay
"Would this void all the early voting going on everywhere? Seems like it should"

A great question, discussed and answered here:

3 U.S.C. § 7 Proves Electors Must Be Appointed On Election Day, Not Certification Day

...CONGRESS AUTHORIZED EARLY VOTING BY ABSENTEE BALLOT.

The article linked above by Ren Jander at Thepostemail.com has this all covered discussing a 9th Circuit case that interpreted Foster v. Love:

“In Voting Integrity Project v. Keisling, 259 F. 3d 1169 (2011), the 9th Circuit reviewed an Oregon statute that allowed early voting by mail, holding that nothing in Foster v. Love prohibited early voting, as long as the election was not consummated until federal Election Day. While Oregon allowed early voting, well before Election Day, unlike the Louisiana case, Oregon also continued voting on Election Day, the same day the election was decided.

The 9th Circuit took notice of federal statutes that require the States to accommodate absentee ballots, which inherently require multi-day early voting, holding that 2 U.S.C. § 7 did not conflict with early absentee ballot voting, because the evils of early voting were not encouraged by it, since the results of early voting were not released to the public until Election Day, and therefore could not influence later elections. The 9th Circuit assumed Congress intended both statutes to co-exist.”

Early voting is only part of “the election”, and as long as the election isn’t consummated prior to Election Day, the 9th Circuit was cool with it. Will SCOTUS be cool with it? I think so. Because Congress is given authority over the “time” of choosing electors. In McPherson, SCOTUS stated that not even the Legislature could mess with the time, and in that case, Michigan was forced to change her statute to comply with Congress setting a uniform day for electors to meet, just as Louisiana was forced to change her statute allowing federal elections to be consummated in October. (See my previous post.)

In Foster v. Love, the Court defined “the election” as the combined actions of voters and officials in selecting a winner on “the day” prescribed by Congress, aka election day. This is why, throughout the oral argument for Foster v. Love, the law was consistently referred to as the federal election day statute.

Early voting is allowed, because Congress has authorized it by way of absentee ballot statutes. But Congress has not authorized late ballots, or canvassing past Election Day. And to the extent a State, by legislative enactment, or otherwise, let’s call it Executive Branch usurpation, as happened in both Pennsylvania and Georgia, such extensions are preempted by the federal election day statutes, as was the holding in Foster v. Love, and McPherson v. Blacker, which held:

“The third clause of section 1 of Article II of the Constitution is: ‘The Congress may determine the time of choosing the Electors, and the day on which they shall give their votes; which day shall be the same throughout the United States.’…The state law in question here fixes the first Wednesday of December as the day for the meeting of the electors, as originally designated by Congress. In this respect it is in conflict with the act of Congress, and must necessarily give way.

[The money shot...]

You see how they did that? State law cannot change federal election day. Louisiana tried that. But Louisiana got squashed 9-0. You can’t consummate the election on any other day besides the day prescribed by Congress, this year falling on November 3, 2020. It’s ok to have early voting, as long as the States don’t allow the results to be known, and as long as the election isn’t consummated before election day.

That being understood, in what universe does Congress allow a federal election to be consummated after federal election day? Not the one we are living in, unless we are now living in a nation completely untethered to federal statutes, and long held Supreme Court precedent.

...

16 posted on 12/11/2020 1:13:51 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 5 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

But Democrats don’t give a damned about laws, especially our Constitution unless it serves their purpose tp achieve their end goals. Activist judges and social democrats need to start paying a personal price for their anti-Americanism dictates if this country is to survive as a Constitutional Republic!


17 posted on 12/11/2020 1:16:42 PM PST by drypowder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Hill
"Won’t the defense simply argue that the votes were cast on (or before) election day, but only that the administrative act of counting the votes wasn’t completed on that day?"

Well, they could certainly try to argue that, but it would be going against a unanimous SCOTUS decision (& ironically, a 9th circuit case as well). Explained in post #16.

18 posted on 12/11/2020 1:17:41 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 12 | View Replies]

To: Fai Mao
I want a 9-0 in favor. But, a 7-2 or 8-1 would be good too. 5-4 is civil war.

Don't kid yourself. CWII is already here. Any judgement in favor of Texas is going to set the libtards off into a tizzy and any judgement in their favor is also going to set them off into a tizzy.

Be prepared. Be armed.

19 posted on 12/11/2020 1:18:49 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 10 | View Replies]

To: jersey117
"Was this case cited in the Texas brief?"

Unfortunately, it looks like they didn't.

20 posted on 12/11/2020 1:19:18 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 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 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