Did Justice Alito set a ‘Safe Harbor’ trap by setting Pennsylvania response deadline a day AFTER?

NOQ Report ^ | December 4, 2020 | JD Rucker

[kellymcneill]

Mainstream media and social media legal “scholars” have been celebrating a decision by Justice Samuel Alito. After accepting U.S. Congressman Mike Kelly’s petition challenging the results of the presidential election, Justice Alito set a deadline of December 9th for the state to respond. It’s a conspicuous date since the so-called “Safe Harbor” date for picking electors is December 8th.

This has been interpreted by nearly everyone as an indication the Supreme Court does not want to get involved with the election shenanigans, and that very well may be the case. But in this particularly scenario, it would behoove a reluctant Supreme Court to act quickly and decisively if they do not want to get involved because this petition has many challenges. It’s likely to be thrown out, as lower courts have, because the decisions in question have been in place for months but Pennsylvania Republicans did not act until after President Trump appeared to lose. This calls into question their motivation and resolve; a quick dismissal by the Supreme Court would play towards their perceived stance of not wanting to get involved.

By slow-playing this petition, it’s very possible Justice Alito is giving Republicans an open door to contest not only the election results but the electors as well. Below is the provision for “Safe Harbor” in which I highlighted two relevant pieces of information.

[kvanbrunt2]

because the decisions in question have been in place for months but Pennsylvania Republicans did not act until after President Trump appeared to lose. >>>. They waited because the PA supreme court ruled that no one had standing as there wasn’t and election. Only theoretical harm. Kaufmann i believe.. Kelly et al waited till they lost and then the PA supreme court said. too late laches. Can’t have it both ways. The SCOTUS could rule on the laches and let the rest go back to the PA supreme ct.

[Professional]

You are either a fraud or you’re a bed wetter. Which is it?

You are so stupid as to think that the SCOTUS isn’t fully aware of the importance of this election and the various ramifications within? LOL.... oh brother...

Yes, let’s destroy the GOP over the next 4 years so we can start over (within a system of completely emboldened criminals that just blatantly stole a national election)

You are a sharp one...

[rfp1234]

Tiny bhubbles...

[Blood of Tyrants]

Destruction of evidence? Like mixing in suspect ballots with real ones so that they are indistinguishable?

[JohnBovenmyer]

Another with a similar take: William A. Jacobson

[Blood of Tyrants]

Interesting. However, the one thng you can count on is GOP cowardice.

[The MAGA-Deplorian]

Attorney Sidney Powell says there’s plenty of time for President Donald Trump’s legal team to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.

“With the fraud case, the Dec. 8 deadline doesn’t apply,” Powell said Friday during an appearance on Newsmax TV’s “Stinchfield” in reference to the “safe harbor” deadline that frees a state from further challenge if it resolves all disputes and certifies its voting results.

“We have at least until Dec. 14,” she said.

“We might file more suits. The court in Michigan or Wisconsin today just gave us a great order recognizing that. These are not pure election contests we are filing. These are massive fraud suits that can set aside the results of the election due to this fraud at any time. The states should not be certifying election results in the face of it.”

Sounds like Alito set a trap.

[Shadow44]

Cry all you want, but the courts are doing NOTHING.

Please tell me why people need to continue to support grifters like Perdue and Loeffler, who are doing not a SINGLE thing to support the president.

Please tell me why the GOP deserves to continue to have a majority in the Senate after every single Senator sold out American workers for H1Bs?

Keep plan trusting about how we need to keep filling the RNC's coffers for the midterms as if they even matter at this point.

[mrsmith]

Thanks for brining up the “laches”.

I don’t see where that applies here since the Trump campaign suffered no harm in the primaries- so what could they go to court about?

[Lurkinanloomin]

They’re ducking it, just like they did with Obama’s ineligibility.

[kvanbrunt2]

There was the article posted on FR last night which said the Republicans did not have standing to challenge a statute until after they’ve been harmed, not before. Now we’re told that laches (too late to challenge). The judicial and electoral machinery is corrupt. We’re supposed to sit down and shut up, and eat the crap sandwich the dems are feeding us. Were I younger........>>> Yes this is what the PA supreme scum did. I think the SCOTUS will take the case, rule on the laches and remand back to the PA scum court to resolve the constitutionality of the the mail in law Act 77.

[Dr. Franklin]

The so-called "Safe Harbor" law is officially, 3 U.S. Code § 5, Determination of controversy as to appointment of electors:

If any State shall have provided, by laws enacted prior to the day fixed for the appointment of the electors, for its final determination of any controversy or contest concerning the appointment of all or any of the electors of such State, by judicial or other methods or procedures, and such determination shall have been made at least six days before the time fixed for the meeting of the electors, such determination made pursuant to such law so existing on said day, and made at least six days prior to said time of meeting of the electors, shall be conclusive, and shall govern in the counting of the electoral votes as provided in the Constitution, and as hereinafter regulated, so far as the ascertainment of the electors appointed by such State is concerned.

The case might turn on whether the PA SoS, governor and Supreme Court made a final determination of the controversy according to judicial or other methods or procedures If SCOTUS rules that PA didn't follow the proper procedures, it could declare it didn't meet the Safe Harbor requirements. That would be significant, as it would deny the elector certification by the governor the presumption of validity in Congress. SCOTUS could also state that this is an issue for PA state legislature to address, embarrassing the PA state senators who refused to address the issue.

[TexasFreeper2009]

quote “because the decisions in question have been in place for months but Pennsylvania Republicans did not act until after President Trump appeared to lose”

lie

Trump has been fighting against the mail in changes since way before the election!

[mrsmith]

The Constitution puts the final say on the election in the hands of our Sens and Reps in Congress.
Without that we don’t have a republic.

So, the courts don’t decide... but they do test and develop the evidence that our congresspeople (and state legislatures to an extent) can use to decide.

“A republic if you can keep it.”

[Dr. Franklin]

I think that the point is that a laches defense doesn’t address the merits of the complaint. Therefore, the argument is that the Safe Harbor requirements have not been met.

[Bellagio]

The “Safe Harbor” Deadline – The U.S. Code (3 U.S.C. §5) provides that if election results are contested in any state, and if the state, prior to election day, has enacted procedures to settle controversies or contests over electors and electoral votes, and if these procedures have been applied, and the results have been determined six days before the electors’ meetings, then these results are considered to be conclusive, and will apply in the counting of the electoral votes.

For Pete's sake. Translating it simply means... There is a 6 day lock/protection AGAINST the introduction of NEW controversies or contesting of EC electors that have not already been remedied and procedures applied(satisfied by legal remedy).

And if so, then the EC delegate ascertainment by the Governor is conclusive and the delegates verified will apply to the EC count on Dec 14.

But if litigation is in-process and NO legal remedy has been applied by the Safe-Harbor day, the 8th... then the day becomes mute and the litigation continues because the safe-harbor provisions have not been met.

Alito definitely played his hand well. To impose a December 9th deadline automatically forces the 8th to become mute so the litigation can continue.

[Secret Agent Man]

I dont really like my tablet’s touch keyboard.

Thank God i didn’t grow up with a cellphone or smartphone.

[ZULU]

If Trump looses i agree with you.

The GOP has just become a roadblock in dealing effectively with Bolsheviks

[wiseprince]

Meh. At this point the right reaction is for a 15% turnout nationwide. This is hardly a government of the people.

[Jamestown1630]

I bought me one of those chunky-sounding/feeling mechanical keyboards for my home desktop setup. Really nice feel, and makes my typing faster with fewer errors.