To: nikos1121
None of these guys are lawyers, and they have lost every flakey case they’ve filed. Their “case” is “docketed” which only means it was received and logged in. It is not a determination by the court to hear it.
This is flakey Don Quixote stuff.
16 posted on
11/28/2022 12:48:07 PM PST by
Fido969
(45 is Superman! )
To: Fido969
Not true. They’ve lost in the lower courts, allowing them to pursue it in The SCOTUS.
If it’s so frivolous, then why is it even on the docket to be discussed.
Only 4 judges are needed to move it forward.
To: Fido969
Also, it’s docketed as an “emergency” hearing.
Even if they lose in the end, if it moves forward for discussion it could change everything.
To: Fido969
None of these guys are lawyers, and they have lost every flakey case they’ve filed. Their “case” is “docketed” which only means it was received and logged in. It is not a determination by the court to hear it. This is flakey Don Quixote stuff.
Federal judges have contempt for upholding the idea of individuals having fundamental rights that are "inalienable". They typically dismiss such claims with little to no comment. If they must write an opinion, they misstate either the evidence or the argument. This case is not likely to be heard at SCOTUS. If Texas couldn't sue Pennsylvania at SCOTUS, its doubtful Joe Shmoe can.
29 posted on
11/28/2022 12:56:35 PM PST by
Dr. Franklin
("A republic, if you can keep it." )
To: Fido969
This is flakey Don Quixote stuff. You are giving up too early.
See the interviews...
62 posted on
11/28/2022 1:41:01 PM PST by
C210N
(Everything will be okay in the end. If it’s not okay, it’s not the end.)
To: Fido969
“None of these guys are lawyers, and they have lost every flakey case they’ve filed.”
I would’ve been good if they had found a lawyer with SCOTUS experience to work with/for them on this. It’s an interesting case.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson