Posted on 03/31/2021 4:27:46 AM PDT by MtnClimber
They appear to be cowards or crooks or compromised. Cowards, crooks, or compromised seems to be the only way to explain the decision-making of the United States Supreme Court. The Court's unwillingness to make any decisions regarding the presidential election of 2020 is a historic failure. These last twelve months have seen the Court refuse to do its duty. The Court refused to be a co-equal branch of the federal government.
With the Bush v. Gore of 2000, there is legal precedent. Just twenty short years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court took Bush v. Gore, a presidential election case, so the precedent was there. Over this last year, the Supreme Court had the opportunity to address election law questions before the election last summer, right before the election, right after the election, and even prior to the inauguration in January. On all these occasions, the majority of the Supreme Court judges refused to hear any case dealing with the presidential election. They stuck their heads in the sand and acted as if they had no role.
One could argue, successfully, that January 6 on the Washington Mall happened because of the lack of integrity and guts in the Supreme Court. Because of their blatant disassociation with being a coequal branch with the presidency and Congress, the Court has lost enormous respect from half of America. This is dangerous to a democratic republic. One must ask, why would they be willing to do this? Are they cowards, crooks, compromised, or something else? Can these be the only answers to this seemingly impotent Supreme Court?
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
The levels that the rot has reached do not bode well for our future.
Foolishness.
They are true believers.
All of the above?
A few are crooks that are compromised and the rest cowards.
Cowards? politically most certainly
Crooks? unlikely but not inconceivable
Compromised? Very likely in one or two cases
For whatever reasoning they worked out in their hapless brain.. they too wanted Trump out. Except for Thomas... he hasn’t lost TRUTH .. he keeps his values and judges on those grounds.
he is much like Reinquist.
The coup was to rid the ‘sophisticated ‘in Washington from this man who refused to be brought under their control.
their love for elitism and kingly status, is all that matters. no time or care for the people..
1. His description of the Supreme Court as a “coequal branch” of government with the President and Congress makes no sense in this context. He’s using this argument to make the case that every branch of the Federal and state governments should DEFER to the Supreme Court as the SOLE ARBITER of disputes related to presidential elections.
2. Using the 2000 election case as a “precedent” that justifies — even necessitates — Supreme Court involvement in national elections is a bad idea. The Supreme Court greatly exceeded its authority in that case even though it was correct in its main ruling.
For the life of me, I can’t imagine why any intelligent conservative would want Federal courts involved in ANY matter of consequence.
This is nothing new. For decades, SCOTUS refused to hear cases on the right to keep and bear arms, where the Circuit Courts applied Supreme Court precedent for the opposite of what the precedent said.
Institutional failure, or institutional success? That depends on one’s motive. I see the the Supreme Court as having done great damage to the US constitution. It is intellectually dishonest, but gets away with this by applying the legal rule that its decisions are the last word on what “constitutional” means.
This body hallucinated abortion and homosexual marriage into the constitution.
Failure to explore credible claims of election fraud is not unexpected. It’s a “hot button” issue, and the court prefers the result that cheating delivered.
I vote for all three.
All 3.
The Supreme Court in my opinion was given the opportunity to make some of the most fundamental opinions in the nation’s history regarding the election. They chose poorly and they are now irrelevant and Americans need to simply look at them as nullified and moot. Bet on the fact that 2A cases written by the leftards lawyers are ready to fly. I think the Constitution is nothing but toilet paper to the left and the Supreme Court is no better than typical sh*t hole country courts.
“Yes.”
Not if Dominion Voting Machines and left-demonKKKrats have anything to say about it.
All of the above!
OK you have a point, but who else is going to cure this mess? And don’t say voters.
How about some of all three.
Clarence Thomas has been reluctant to take on recent 2A cases because he has no confidence that the Supreme Court as it is currently constituted will uphold the fundamental right to keep and bear arms.
The state legislatures had every opportunity to deal with the 2020 election fiasco. They deserve more criticism over that mess than all the other branches of government combined.
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.