Posted on 12/09/2020 3:27:43 AM PST by where's_the_Outrage?
Legal experts have harshly criticized a lawsuit filed with the Supreme Court by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton against four states President-elect Joe Biden won in the 2020 election.
'Publicity Stunt' Supreme Court Will Never Hear Legal experts have harshly criticized a lawsuit filed with the Supreme Court by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton against four states President-elect Joe Biden won in the 2020 election.
"Anyway, it takes five votes to grant a motion for leave to file — which isn't going to happen," Vladeck said. "And it'll take some time. So chalk this up as mostly a stunt — a dangerous, offensive, and wasteful one, but a stunt nonetheless."
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
"Darragh Roche 2 hrs ago"
That would be the same “Legal Experts” who will swear Hillary has never broken any laws.
Gotta love those agenda-packing “experts”.
Newsweak amd its “legal experts.”
I smell the desperation in INGSOC-Newsweek with this article.
WTH is a barely known Irish writer with a pi$$ poor CV doing writing inaccurate articles for this rag?
They can’t get anybody else?
Previous judges would not hear voter fraud cases, deciding that, if they were to consider Trump’s claims,
they would run the risk of “disenfranchising” Biden voters...a singularly dishonest argument. Disenfranchisement
occurs when people are deprived of the right to vote. No one was "deprived" of the vote here.
No one can disenfranchise an illegal voter, particularly when that “Biden voter” is
<><> dead,
<><> an amorphous computer algorithm,
<><> or a form mfg in a Chinese print shop submitted as a vote.
Previous judges would not hear voter fraud cases, deciding that, if they were to consider Trump’s claims,
they would run the risk of “disenfranchising” Biden voters...a singularly dishonest argument. Disenfranchisement
occurs when people are deprived of the right to vote. No one was "deprived" of the vote here.
No one can disenfranchise an illegal voter, particularly when that “Biden voter” is
<><> dead,
<><> an amorphous computer algorithm,
<><> or a form mfg in a Chinese print shop submitted as a vote.
Fake news. Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in this matter so adding it to their docket is automatic. No vote needed. Now whether they schedule arguments or dismiss it without hearing will depend on what the defendant states submit tomorrow.
I though Dershowitz said otherwise.
I thought that they only docketed the case, not that they were going to actually hear it?
Yes, and some of those “legal experts” have a law degree and some just work for CNN, MSNBC, NPR, etc. Some of the most arrogant and criminal people on the planet are lawyers. And most of those consider themselves “experts”.
I will defer to you on the difference in docket and hearing as I am not versed in the difference, I was basically using another thread:
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3913477/posts
“Update (1515ET): Just twelve hours after it was filed, the US Supreme Court has officially put Texas’s lawsuit against Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin on the docket, meaning the case will be heard.”
CHICAGO, May 11, 2018 - Newly released survey data from the American Bar Association on the nationwide population of lawyers indicates a total of 1,338,678 licensed, active attorneys in the United States.
The Court ordered a response, which makes additional action on the merits possible, even likely, because failure to hear the controversy would diminish the Court’s standing as the country’s ultimate legal arbiter. One cannot puff and preen about the Supreme Court’s essential role but then run and hide from the job when an especially big case is dropped on the doorstep, ready for decision.
It's been going around all evening. But fortunately it's fake news.
Issues get to the Supreme Court in one of two ways. They are either appeals of lower court rulings, and the justices vote on whether or not to hear them, or the are cases where the Supreme Court is the first court to hear them, and the jurisdiction in those cases is outlined in Article III, Section 2. In the Texas case there was never any question as to whether the Supreme Court would accept the case. But there are no guarantees from here. The Supreme Court has requested responses from the defendants by tomorrow and once they review that then the will either schedule formal arguments from both sides or they will dismiss the case out of hand. If it's dismissed then it's dead. If the court scheduled oral arguments then what happens depends on how well Texas makes their case. None of this is a done deal.
No one, save GOD, can separate the buckwheat from the bullsh$tt votes in this election. The voter fraud has damaged and tainted the entire election. Honestly, I don’t even know if it was accurate BEFORE the Democrats began stuffing the ballot box. Computer hacking, by foreign actors, 4/5 th vote for Trump.....I mean was any of it accurate?
Every American should be asking if voting even matters. The Democrats lust for power and money at any cost. The deep state lusts for the same. Both are willing to sell out their fellow Americans, and then demand we send our sons and daughters to fight for their next project.
Without fair and accurate voting, we are Slaves or Indentured servants. We are all in this together. Thanks for Texas standing up for all of us.
The question is, Will the SCOTUS?
Texas has a right to peacefully leave the Republic, perhaps we should by property there.
Newsweek, legal experts, funny
Those who scream loudest hath much to cover!
“ A BRILLIANT LEGAL ATTACK: Trump is asking the USSC to make “every legal vote count,” that the court invalidate illegal votes.”
Not accurate with this case.
TX is asking SCOTUS to officially rule on the 4 States who unconstitutionally changed their voting laws, which resulted in them disenfranchising the votes of States who did it correctly. TX is being joined by multiple other States, which will make it more difficult for them to ignore the suit when the 4 States respond with “Racism! Covid!”.
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.