Alito Responds To Appeal Asking To Block Biden Win In PA

DAILY WIRE ^ | 12/4/2020 | BROWN

[RummyChick]

Justice Samuel Alito agreed on Thursday to review an appeal against the ruling of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court that tossed a suit alleging the state’s mail-in voting was unconstitutional.

[backwoods-engineer]

I agree. If the fraudulent AZ, GA, MI, PA, WI elections (and therefore electors for Biden) aren’t de-certified by Sunday Dec 6, 3 USC § 5 seems to imply they’re locked in (’Safe Harbor’). IANAL, so I’d love to have some help here.

[vigilante2]

Welcome to Free Republic

[Political Junkie Too]

And Roberts refused to hear the challenges to the PA Supreme Court when they were presented before the election.

-PJ

[sonofagun]

Let’s roll!

[TeddyRay]

Mark Levin said Alito knows what he’s doing. He’s not playing games . The SCOTUS isn’t bound by these deadlines. Likely wants the sixth to happen so can then evaluate for remedy if election in PA was truly unconstitutional and legislature fails to act.

[caww]

Well that’s why I questioned this.....not sure Congress would do the best thing even with GOP advantage....too many turncoats....and even they can be bought.

[spacejunkie2001]

The Ghost and Dr. Franklin!

[TeddyRay]

76 members of PA legislature have signed a petition saying do not seat electors and election was unconstitutional. Is that a dispute? What does that mean?

[Dr. Franklin]

Am I off on my observation?

No. Usually in things like death penalty appeals, a Justice issues a stay, then refers that matter promptly to the whole court for review. The fact that they are dragging this out tells me they don't want to decide it quickly, and are waiting for the last moment to step in. If they follow the precedent from 2000, then tomorrow would be the day. Othewise, if they agree with the Trump team, they would really need to enjoin the governor to certify a different slate of electors.

[JustaTech]

Safe Harbor requires disputes to be resolved. If there is one or more challenge open on the docket of SCOTUS, that is the opposite of resolved.

The final disposition is Congress on Jan 6. If the Congresscritters can’t agree to accept enough electors to give either candidate 270, the process falls through to a contingent election in the House, which Trump wins.

I think the Trump team strategy is to generate grave doubts about the disputed state elections, which will provide ammo for Congress to reject electors if state legislatures don’t man up in the meantime.

[Dr. Franklin]

The constitution clearly states that all disputes must be resolved by the 8th.

Really? Where? The Safe Harbor Date is set by statute, which by a vote of both houses of Congress can be ignored. The U.S. Constitution makes no reference to what Congress does when it receives competing slates of electors from a state. The statute reads that in that case, the slate certified by the governor is preferred. So, after Dec. 8th, the Court would likely need to enjoin the governor to certify a different slate of electors to enforce its judgment.

[Dr. Franklin]

I don’t see SCOTUS ordering a new election. Their order must provide a constitutional way forward to relief.

SCOTUS won't order a new election. It could order that the mail in ballots be excluded from the final vote count giving Trump a victory. Alternatively, it could order the entire election illegal and require decertification of the electors, which forces the PA legislature to take a stand and vote the electors themselves.

[Dr. Franklin]

Thanks.

[backwoods-engineer]

Thanks. Yeah, I was thinking wrongly: Safe Harbor is Dec 8 not Dec 6, as I said.

[backwoods-engineer]

So, the disputes won’t be resolved by Dec 8 (I said Dec 6 but that was wrong). But, the votes in AZ, GA, MI, PA, WI have already been certified by their governors. What then? Can SCOTUS invalidate? Does House of Reps? 3 USC (sections 5, 6, 15) is so complicated. I’m fairly intelligent, but that is a wall of legalese.

[poconopundit]

What you say makes sense. Hope you’re right. In any case, it’s good to hear your good reasonings.

[Mariner]

“The state is under dispute by the state legislatures right now and Gov won’t resolve.”

No, not yet.

Until/unless both houses in PA vote to disregard the election and send their own electors, there is no dispute.

[Safrguns]

So he is going to review the case a day AFTER it won’t matter any more???

Really???

[GOP Poet]

yep

[ALASKA]

Agreed and this is more than courage. It would be patriothood.