Posted on 12/11/2020 12:55:02 PM PST by rxsid
libtard socialists care about laws when they like the laws
libtard socialists dont care about laws when they dont like the laws
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.
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.
SCOTUS 9-0: Election Day Is One Single Day. Listen to oral argument from Foster v. Love (1997)
I'm in a very pessimistic mood today. I have zero patience today.
Perhaps tomorrow I'll be more in-line with your thinking.
Bookmarked-—VERY compelling argument for NO post-election day votes to count!!!!!!!!!!
Peace FRiend. I think we agree far more than we disagree. I’d take a 5-4 and gladly. I just want more.
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?
Late ballots a.k.a. ballots brought in at 0-dark-hundred Nov 4th.
NOT allowed, per Foster v Love.
Can’t change the constitution by statute. You have to amend constitution if that’s not how you want it done.
"Under 2 U. S. C. ยงยง 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
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.
Makes sense. Laws need to be followed.
Trump wins in a landslide.
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.
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.
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.
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.
That’s right, and that’s what the LOVE case decided!
Thanks for sharing this very important case.
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.
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.