Replies

After reading some of these arguments, something to note stands out...

Arguments to dismiss seem to rely on the premise that claims of fraud are baseless and unproven. (because the lower courts wouldn’t hear them)

So... i’m anticipating or speculating that SCOTUS will zero in on that first... Are claims of fraud that would impact the result baseless or not?

seems to me that if significant fraud CAN be proven, then the defendants do not have a defense.

I think the first thing they have to do is determine if Texas has standing, is the case moot, is it ripe, is the relief sought within reason,...etc.

A number of legal experts have opined they expect SCOTUS to deny this case very quickly. We shall see.

I understand the SCOTUS desire not to take up the case. But anyone the least bit curious has plenty places to go to understand the allegations of widespread fraud, and the plaintiff states with the Trump team are prepared to prove it given opportunity. This amounts to many states with righteous cause suing to protect the interests of their citizens who acted in good faith versus states acting to preserve the fraudulent actions of states and officials. Would the SCOTUS seriously choose to thumb their noses at those who behaved within the law and in good faith?

What incentive would either side then have to act in good faith if SCOTUS votes to preserve the fraud? Anarchy would soon prevail perpetrated by BOTH sides. If the members of SCOTUS think about it just a little bit, from a practical perspective, they have no choice but to rule in favor of the plaintiff states. Otherwise, all hell breaks loose from BOTH sides.