Pfffft. As I pointed out the multiple times Brunson was posted here prior to when the USSCT unceremoniously threw it in the trash can, this case has no merit because the court lacks jurisdiction to grant the relief sough. Period. Full stop.
And here’s another article misleadingly passing out the hopium. Anyone can file a petition for reconsideration. I’d bet ten grand that it promptly receives exactly the same treatment as did the main case
Exactly right.
The Court has no legal authority to remove large numbers of Congress criters and the President and Vice President.
sadly I agree ;)
Re: 13 - Good ‘friggin grief. This is popping up again?
Thus will fail and should.
SCOTUS has none, zero jurisdiction to remove the President or Vice-President from office. Period.
Brunson wants what he claims are unconstitutional acts to be remedied by…. more unconstitutional acts! Genius! Pure genius!
Brunson is a kook.
Will now await the “fraud vitiates everything” canard being posted.
this case has no merit because the court lacks jurisdiction to grant the relief sough. Period. Full stop.
Obviously so, but there is also ridiculously no standing and the 10th Circuit chose that route.
Brunson wrote to the 10th Circuit that the alleged action, "violated the rights of every citizen of the U.S.A. and perhaps the rights of every person living...." The alleged injury cannot get less particularized to Brunson than that. The 10th Circuit tossed it on standing.
As the 10th Circuit noted, "none of his supporting authorities suggests that allegations of fraud, acts of war, or the violation of allegedly “inherent unalienable (God-given) rights,” id., relieve a plaintiff from demonstrating Article III standing."
These are the reasons he is going to scotus:
“ Before a decision was rendered by the 10th Circuit, Brunson realized he could bypass the appeals court and go straight to the Supreme Court by invoking the high court’s Rule 11. Under the rule, a case pending before the appeals court may bypass that court’s decision and go to the Supreme Court if it “is of such imperative public importance as to justify deviation from normal appellate practice and to require immediate determination in this Court.” The Supreme Court received Brunson’s petition in September 2022.”