BREAKING: Brunson Brothers Case Denied by Supreme Court

The Gateway Pundit ^ | January 9, 2023 | Joe Hoft

[Dr. Franklin]

The Brunson Brothers election integrity lawsuit was dismissed by the US Supreme Court on Monday.

[Dr. Franklin]

As expected, SCOTUS did nothing. The unspoken option becomes more inevitable.

[FryingPan101]

Bull crap. They had a case.

[datura]

No surprise.

[Hootowl99]

Bummer but denying the petition was the most likely outcome.

[Tench_Coxe]

An article I think on ‘uncoverDC’ did a pretty good job explaining why this would happen.

[Fido969]

As predicted.

[Fido969]

Another Kracken that evaporates when reality is encountered.

[Deo volente]

Status Quo SCOTUS.

“Mailed ballots are very good for you! Sit down and shut up. Nothing to see here, move along.”

/sarc

[j.havenfarm]

Bull crap. They had no case. No authority for the court to do what was requested. Put this in the file with Insurrection Act, magic executive orders, Quo Warranto writs, and other cotton candy dreams. You only get credit for “at least doing something” if what you do has any reasonable chance of success. This never did

[nwrep]

Well said.

[marktwain]

Yes, no surprise.

The court acted as the Supreme Court is supposed to act.

Many on this forum predicted exactly this result, myself included.

To expect the Supreme Court to invalidate 220 years of precedent and the Constitution itself, was much, much too much of a bridge too far.

[Robert DeLong]

[Fido969]

lol.

Grifter.

Here is the truth about this piece of garbage:

https://www.uncoverdc.com/2022/12/30/the-truth-about-the-brunson-case/

[T.B. Yoits]

SCOTUS can’t take a case they’d need to recuse themselves from.

[Dr. Franklin]

Honestly, unless there is major civil unrest, SCOTUS is not likely to reconsider this. It has about a 0% chance of success at present.

[Dr. Franklin]

Bull crap. They had no case. No authority for the court to do what was requested. Put this in the file with Insurrection Act, magic executive orders, Quo Warranto writs, and other cotton candy dreams. You only get credit for “at least doing something” if what you do has any reasonable chance of success. This never did

“It is not the critic who counts, not the one who points out how the strong man stumbled or how the doer of deeds might have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred with sweat and dust and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs and comes short again and again; who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, and spends himself in a worthy cause; who, if he wins, knows the triumph of high achievement; and who, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat.”

Theordore Roosevelt
Sorbonne, in Paris, France, on April 23, 1910, from the speech entitled “Citizenship in a Republic”

[Duke of Milan]

Yeah, ‘uncoverDC’ did do a good job explaining why it would not be accepted. A better case is needed.

[CFW]

This is not a surprise. A denial of cert was expected.

[Williams]

Can’t believe people really thought the Supreme Court was going to touch this with a ten foot pole.

[BrexitBen]

The Convention of States better take place quickly.

It would appear to be the last bulwark for the survival of the constitutional republic.