The suit should be expanded to include Nevada, Arizona, and Virginia. And include the right to observe and challenge each ballot was forcibly denied by each state as one of the complaints.
SCOTUS will be setting precedent and this must be kept in mind with how they decide.
It is a time for arms. OHIO.
I question Minnesota results.
Hard to tell, they already ruled that voters have no standing, so it’s not guaranteed that the President has any standing either. I don’t see any sign of reversal in the downward trend.
Reality check; courts and politics are no longer a remedy for a communist coup.
Not breaking news Its almost 12 hours old. LOL.
The real breaking news is what’s going to happen next.
The SCOTUS already telegraphed through their short little denial that the proper plaintiffs in these cases is the state legislature, as that is who was usurped of their constitutional duties and damaged - not PDJT, not voters, not States.
Good news - a lawsuit already exists brought by members of the PA legislature (is it enough for the SCOTUS? Who knows) which is and has been pending a decision on the Writ of Cert since October. The main point of this case is that election laws were changed in an unconstitutional manner. Fraud is only evidence toward the cause of action and not the subject of the cause of action.
So now, if Governor Newsom runs, he can just print all the ballots in California, fill them in his name, count them using faulty software, get 101% of the vote with 110% voters participating, and nobody would have the standing to oppose it?
Are you suuure this is “Breaking?”
Old News. I’m bored.
Mag, you should be on his legal team. I agree. I think that is what the plan going forward seems to be, bring each state to the Supreme Ct individually.
It is, nevertheless, a sad day in this country when the top court in the land refuses, for whatever reason, to hear an argument between one half of the country and the other half.
This whole thing stinks. This is there job. I guess I just assumed they would do it.
Story about SCOTUS denying the case was posted yesterday. Over 1000 replies.
If nothing else, this case puts a damper on those who say Trump filled the court with people who will bend to his will. That’s a positive.
Well, according to the criminal USSC, you have no standing before the election fraud, you have no standing during the election fraud and you have no standing after the election fraud.
The suit should be brought by the repub legislators of the cheat States who’s power was usurped by their SoSs, AGs, governors, election boards and PA SC.
The legislators should have “standing”
Austin, TX, Release: December 11, 2020. For Immediate Release
Below is Chairman Allen WestâÂÂs statement regarding the decision by the Supreme Court to dismiss Texasâ constitutionally legitimate and critical lawsuit.
âÂÂThe Supreme Court, in tossing the Texas lawsuit that was joined by seventeen states and 106 US congressman, has decreed that a state can take unconstitutional actions and violate its own election law. Resulting in damaging effects on other states that abide by the law, while the guilty state suffers no consequences. This decision establishes a precedent that says states can violate the US constitution and not be held accountable. This decision will have far-reaching ramifications for the future of our constitutional republic. Perhaps law-abiding states should bond together and form a Union of states that will abide by the constitution.âÂÂ
The Texas GOP will always stand for the Constitution and for the rule of law even while others donâÂÂt.
OK, I’m ready for the backlash
If each state are truly sovereign members of The United States, No state has the right to challenge how another state chooses to (in this case : allow) their own official to screw their residents out of they right to vote under the laws established by their own state legislators. If those legislators do not assert their constitutional power and authority on the matter it’s not to the injury of neighboring/member states. Instead it’s a direct and local injury with in it’s own borders and jurisdiction. The people of such states are the injured parties. The Supreme Court , in this argument, could do no more than remind state legislators of their constitutional authority. While constitutional authority is given to state legislators, nothing compels them to assert that authority. They have delegated it. It does not matter (outside of that state) that state laws were/are ignored because the law makers themselves grant a waver of permission simply by not acting to asserting their own authority to enforce laws they establish.
As much as I agree with everyone who supported the Texas SCOTUS filing, I would expect the same response from SCOTUS if this were Pennsylvania vs Kansas in the 2020 election.
Teump is headed back to the Supreme Court with John Eastman as his lawyer. Eastman has been out 3 weeks with Covid.