Posted on 01/19/2021 6:26:54 AM PST by Heartlander
Don’t have any faith in the feckless Supremes.
Somebody has got to do this, it cannot be allowed to drop like the corrupt media/dems want.
Yet with EPA law, the illegal emissions from one state wafting over into another state and the polluting state is libel and the suing state has standing.
But with elections, illegal actions of one state negatively affecting the legal actions of another state and there is no standing.
I know, I know!!! Even if the SCOTUS actually hears the case, it will be immediately tossed as moot!
SCOTUS will be dodging from any and all angles available.
<>Ignore the case
<>Latches
<>Moot
<>New precedent
You name it. I will call it Judicial Dodge Ball.
Feckless, the underused adjective, describes so many members of our society.
Society is missing people with strong moral character and a sense of the difference between right and wrong.
Yes. We need to support and protect those who submitted affidavits.
I have no faith in any aspect of our Banana republic.
DITTO.
“Put not your trust in kings.”
Every person or group who ought to have demonstrated SOME allegiance to American interests and American voters has betrayed them.
Their personal careers, self interest, status, fortunes, perks ... etc. have all meant much more to them.
But with elections, illegal actions of one state negatively affecting the legal actions of another state and there is no standing.
Great comment!
Multiple cases involving election fraud were brought to the SC before the election and they did nothing. Why should we believe they will take election fraud related cases now?
A Supreme Court which dismissed cases due to “lack of standing”, will now dismiss cases because they are moot.
What I want from SCOTUS but afraid will NOT happen:
1) The Constitution is the supreme law of the land
2) The Constitution supremace clause means that Congress can set election laws for Federal officers, not State ballots
3) Further, the Constitution sets the state LEGISLATURES as the authority for elections. I.e no other authority (Judges or Governors) can bypass, change or create exceptions to state election laws
4) If voting district is unable to comply with the laws, that district’s votes MUST be excluded from the tally of votes
What about the “public interest exception to mootness doctrine”? It ought to apply:
Three prong test:
1) Important public issue;
2) Evasive of review and capable of repetition; and
3) Judicial determination necessary to provide guidance to public officials.
The Supreme Court has been under the control of the Democrat Party for some time now.
Starting with the blackmailing of Chief Justice John Roberts the Democrats have asserted their control over certain decisions crucial to their party.
Then the assassination of Antony Scalia cemented the power of the Left over SCOTUS, it had to send a message to the remaining Justices. Conspiracy theory? Maybe, maybe not.
Then the minority leader of the Senate, Charles Schumer, stood in front of the Supreme Court with a mob and threatened the Court, nothing was done about that which further sends a clear message to the court.
All the riots in towns that were allowed to continue and included burning of businesses and even homes and even a Police station burned down by leftist mobs. This further demonstrated the threat to civilized people that Left will do anything they want and nobody will stop them.
Now suppose you are a Judge with a family, do you seriously believe that you and your family can be fully protected if you make the wrong decision? The authorities can’t even protect themselves.
The genie is out of the bottle. The horse is out of the barn. That ship has sailed. Two little too late.
Prepare for bloodshed.
“suppose you are a Judge with a family, do you seriously believe that you and your family can be fully protected if you make the wrong decision?”
If they did not have the guts to confront this before, I don’t see how they would suddenly grow extra testicles, now that the radicals are armed with the full powers of the Federal leviathan.
A thought exercise / question.
Assume that the election fraud evidence is true and of sufficient volume that the supremes cant ignore. That leaves three basic possibilities
1) The ruling comes down in favor of election fraud
2) The ruling is some attempt at a “Solomon” compromise / CYA in which “irregulariaties” are acknowledged but we cant do anything now
3) Evidence is still ignored and the case is either punted on “standing” or “not our job”
Thoughts on the most likely outcome?
Personally I am hoping for #1 but think that #2 is more likely.
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.