Posted on 12/10/2020 7:25:17 AM PST by truthkeeper
The U.S. Supreme Court handed U.S. Rep. Mike Kelly a defeat that could not have been more unequivocal.
In its one-sentence order, with no noted dissents, the high court on Tuesday denied the Republican congressman's emergency request for a preliminary injunction to block the certification of the election results in Pennsylvania and throw out the state's more than 2.5 million mail-in ballots.
Despite the loss, Kelly's lawyer said the case is not over.
He said Kelly, whose 16th Congressional District includes Erie, still plans to join with other Republican petitioners to ask the Supreme Court to grant what is known as a writ of certiorari and hear their case in a regular fashion.
"Petitioners plan to proceed to file a petition for certiorari in the U.S. Supreme Court," lawyer Gregory Teufel, of Pittsburgh, said in an email to the Erie Times-News late Tuesday night. "While disappointing, today’s order only denied preliminary injunctive relief..."
Even if the Supreme Court agrees to a hearing and issues a ruling in Kelly's favor, Kelly by then would have almost certainly have run out of time to achieve his lawsuit's immediate and unprecedented goal — a goal that the lawyers for the administration of Gov. Tom Wolf, a Democrat, told the Supreme Court would represent "one of the most dramatic, disruptive invocations of judicial power in the history of the Republic..."
(Excerpt) Read more at goerie.com ...
Sorry about the rest of the "reporting." The few articles I can find are all insufferable.
Wrong. Stop posting this $4it. They denied emergency relief before taking and hearing the case. That is all still pending.
Only was part of the filing was denied. The case goes on.
In every filing you include a request for immediate relief. You basically ask the court “give me what I want right now”
This is nearly always denied, but gives the Judge a chance to grant that relief if he sees the case as never having a chance of winning because it is frivolous or something.
The rest of the case goes on. But the media keep saying the case was thrown out, and reporting it as a ‘loss’ in the court.
This is the relevant line. There is a lot of confusion about this point. Teufel is Plaintiff's attorney.
a goal that the lawyers for the administration of Gov. Tom Wolf, a Democrat, told the Supreme Court would represent “one of the most dramatic, disruptive invocations of judicial power in the history of the Republic...” in order to offset one of the most corrupt, illegal, despicable acts in all of mankind.
The author of this crap is uninformed, why spread it around?
If they were going to take and hear the case then wouldn't the Supreme Court have granted the emergency relief in order to but a halt on the election till they had time to issue a ruling?
And ask for what? His last filing requested the court issue an emergency injunction. They refused. What's Kelly looking for now?
Plaintiff WILL apply for a Writ of Certioriari so that the USSC can then consider hearing the case on a non-emergency basis.
“ And ask for what? His last filing requested the court issue an emergency injunction. They refused. What’s Kelly looking for now?”
A hearing. The court said no to an emergency injunction, NOT not to a hearing.
So he wants a hearing but he doesn't want the court to do anything? I don't think that's gong to fly.
And do what? What does Kelly want from the court? The injunctive relief was shot down. What's next?
Once the Writ is filed the Court will then determine if they accept the case and proceed with hearing it on a non-emergency basis.
The constitutional issues are there.
“ So he wants a hearing but he doesn’t want the court to do anything?”
An emergency injunction means “Hear me right now....this very minute”.
SCOTUS said “no, wait just a little while”.
Get it now?
The third of three qualifications for standing to sue is to request action that will remediate the damage the plaintiff has suffered and which the court is able to provide. There is no remediation in Kelly's original filing except the emergency injunction and that's out the window. So what is plan B? What is Kelly asking the court to do?
That is why I call them urinalists and not journalists.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, this Court should grant Applicants’ request for an emergency writ of injunction (or alternatively a stay of lower proceedings), grant certiorari on the questions presented herein, treat the Application papers as a merits briefing, and issue a merits decision as soon as practicable.
You should understand that the Erie Times-News is a rabidly leftwing publication that demands absolute fealty from its editors and reporters in the cause of advancing the Democratic agenda.
Ed Palatella is the only reporter there who’s worth a shit. But he’d probably get fired if he didn’t toe the party line on this.
What's to halt? What would be irreversible?
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.