[Non-Sequitur]

So, in theory, I’d shorten that list to either: 1) the Electors who were forced to cast their vote on Dec. 15, or 2) Presidential and/or Vice Presidential Candidates who were damaged.

In what way? Damages have to be real and concrete, not speculative or hypothetical. Define them.

Do we yet know why Alito wasn’t at Wednesday’s SCOTUS meeting?

Petulence? Alito's disdain for the Senate since his confirmation hearing isn't any secret.

What’s wrong with this Order from the Third Circuit of Appeals regarding Berg’s case

You mean other than the fact that the motion was denied?

[hoosiermama]

Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr., Ph.D., J.D., who has four degrees from Harvard has an excellent essay at link where he expounds on damage.

http://www.newswithviews.com/Vieira/edwin84.htm

BP, this was given to Non before and he was unable to comprehend it.

[BP2]

>>> In what way? Damages have to be real and concrete, not speculative or hypothetical. Define them.

By that line of logic, absolutely no cases regarding an election can be brought before a judge. LOL

>>> Petulence? Alito’s disdain for the Senate since his confirmation hearing isn't any secret.

If you know anything about Alito, he would have been polite, humble and not left the SCOTUS building. That's his, and every other Justices’, castle - they don't excuse themselves because they feel childish or slighted by a previous political action. It's not like a POTUS and VP elect just pop by every day.

>>> You mean other than the fact that the motion was denied?

The case has been worked at the 3rd Circuit this week...