Posted on 11/22/2020 6:12:02 PM PST by SeekAndFind
Why did they not challenge the legality of vote-by-mail BEFORE the election?
Rule of law?
We don’t need now steenking rule of law!
Ping.
Interesting dilemma.
1. Whereas the state legislature has the sole right to set election law per the US Constitution (as I have read on FR).
2. The new state legislature approved law violates the state constitution.
Which take precedence?
I kind of think that since the state legislature had to approve the State election constitution law, that is the precedence.
Anyone who tells you it is the Spirit of the Law is robbing you and telling you so, to your face.
Not when you have judges who will make it up as they need to.
You did recognize my sarcasm, right?
Because the GOP and their traditional white shoe law firms were eager to see Trump crash and burn.
Since the PA constitution specifically names the incidences in which a absentee ballot may be sent out, I would think that the law allowing for a “no excuse” absentee ballot violates the constitution.
The ruling will be that the PA constitution violates the US constitution giving sole authority to state legislatures without interference. Case dismissed.
I don’t need to be a lawyer to figure that out out.
FORGED BALLOTS, let’s see ‘em.
PA constitution violates US constitution. see above
But what takes precedence?
A. The State legislature.
B. The state constitution.
Per the US Constitution it would appear A is the correct answer.
“PA constitution violates US constitution”
Not necessarily. If the State Legislature approved the State Constitution than that is the election law.
“Why did they not challenge the legality of vote-by-mail BEFORE the election?”
Fair point, but irrelevant.
Was the state Constitution followed or not?
I disagree. The US Constitution grants the state legislatures the power to set election law AS THEY SEE FIT. The PA legislature saw fit to incorporate it into the state constitution.
IANAL, but I might speculate that this would provide an interesting out for those worried about being criminally liable for election fraud in PA. A judge could rule in favor of the plaintiffs and:
- Flip PA to Trump - resulting in the Trump legal team dropping their PA litigation.
- Further investigation into the fraud in PA is halted, and what evidence had been gathered so far doesn’t get entered into court.
- And, of course, it would now look like Trump won PA due to some crafty legal maneuvering, rather than overturning widespread fraud.
My issue with this lawsuit is this — TOO LATE.
Why did they not challenge the legality of vote-by-mail BEFORE the election?
My issue with this lawsuit is this — TOO LATE.
Why did they not challenge the legality of vote-by-mail BEFORE the election?
Though before the election they may well have denied standing due to the event not happening yet. (cynicism opinion, not legal one)
But what takes precedence?
A. The State legislature.
B. The state constitution.
Per the US Constitution it would appear A is the correct answer.
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.