[RideForever]

A writ of quo warranto is not a trial. It challenges an office holders right to hold their position. What basically happens is the court asks the office holder to show the proof that entitles him to hold his position. In Biden's case all he needs to do is show the totals from the 2020 election in November, the results of the meeting of the Electoral College in December, and the certification of those results by Congress in January. After that the issue is settled because no court at any level has invalidated any of those actions. Unl

So close and yet so far away. The The court can determine the facts of the election, solely as to its LAWFULNESS. If criminal fraud is determined as a fact by the court, the election may be ruled UNLAWFUL, and NONE of the candidates on the ballots in question were elected or re-elected. The election didn't happen, the Electoral votes from that state are invalid, and the allegedly new holders of office cannot be deemed legitimate. As a result all their votes since their election are void as fraudulent. That includes the vote to confirm the Electoral votes.

[DoodleDawg]

So close and yet so far away

Am I now?

The court can determine the facts of the election, solely as to its LAWFULNESS.

Indeed courts can. But the Quo Warranto process is not the place for doing that. And there has been a marked lack of success getting the matter before any other court.

If criminal fraud is determined as a fact by the court, the election may be ruled UNLAWFUL, and NONE of the candidates on the ballots in question were elected or re-elected.

Wake me when that happens.