Alan Dershowitz Says Supreme Court May Rule to Let Legislators Pick Alternate Electors

Epoch Times ^ | 12/07/2020 | Tom Ozimek

[pepsi_junkie]

There’s way too much unconstitutional authority given to SCOTUS as though they were some kind of oligarchy.

The first step to recovery is admitting that the SCOTUS is an oligarchy.

[Jim W N]

IMO, the first step in recovery and restoration is declaring the constitutional limits of EACH of the three branches of the feds including SCOTUS.

[steve86]

Jesus’ sacrifice created the potential for man’s souls to be saved, on an individual basis. Before that, none were saved. Afterward, salvation is dependent on on individual beliefs AND actions and repentance, and the temporary suffering of Purgatory, or the permanent suffering of hell, are still waiting for all who leave the earthly life with stains on their soul. You seem to believe in heaven but not hell, as though all (or all believers?) are saved subsequent to the sacrifice.

[Yaelle]

Why is Alan Dershowitz still given a platform to speak and to make money? At least Weinstein mostly waited til they were 18.

[Jim W N]

Wrong again McFry.

Jesus died for the sins of the whole world (1 John 2:2). That’s a fact Jack.

However, the money freely deposited in everyone’s account must be withdrawn to benefit the recipient. If one does not receive Christ, then sadly he is lost.

The issue is no longer sin. The issue is Christ.

[FreeReign]

State legislators exercise federal power when they pick state electors. The power doesn't come from a state constitution. The power comes from the federal US Constitution, in Article II Section 1.

No. That's still state power.

Jenna Ellis on Newsmax just called it a federal constitution responsibility.

I agree with here.

[FreeReign]

Now. Dr. John Eastman, also on Newsmax says the state legislature's powers to select electors comes directly from the federal constitution.

As I said, these are federal powers. They are granted in the US Federal Constitution. The power doesn't come from any state constitution.

[SeekAndFind]

RE: Why is Alan Dershowitz still given a platform to speak and to make money?

I dunno, last I heard, we’re still a country that recognizes the principle of “innocent until proven guilty”. Did that change?

[Golden Eagle]

Listening to the Jay Sekulow show from earlier today.

He and his team say there could be a potential reason that the USSC would rule in a way that grants a potential solution to all states at once, because of what they called “original jurisdiction” which would prevent other states, even if they had no issues with their election, but might complain that a ruling that only affected one state could unfairly unbalance the election.

Far above my head, but it did sound hopeful.

https://aclj.org/election-law/breaking-justice-alito-orders-response-in-pa-case

https://hardnoxandfriends.com/2020/12/07/breaking-aclj-constitutional-shocker-original-jurisdiction-on-vote-dilution/

[linMcHlp]

“state legislature’s powers to select electors comes directly from the federal constitution”

[linMcHlp]

Good catch, and thank you.

[pepsi_junkie]

first step in recovery and restoration is declaring the constitutional limits of EACH of the three branches of the feds including SCOTUS.

.... after admitting that they are no longer operating as representatives of the people within the legal boundaries of our constitution. None of them, but especially the judiciary. IT turns out, I think, that we are 100% in agreement on this topic.

[Boise3981]

Jenna Ellis on Newsmax just called it a federal constitution responsibility.

Maybe her lack of understanding of basic constitutional principles is why she keeps losing cases?

The constitution specifically grants states the right to select electors however they like. The only federal part is setting the date.

Elections are exclusive state powers. Period. Full stop. End of story.

Just because it's mentioned in the federal constitution doesn't mean it's a federal power. Our constitution is setup very specifically: Federal power and state power. The states can't exercise federal power and the feds can't exercise state power. The two don't mingle. It's part of the federal system meant to divide up government power such that no one group or person got too powerful. The Federalists literally wrote a book on this. I'd suggest reading it.

The electors don't even travel to DC to do the voting. They do it in the state capitol. There's absolutely zero about this process that makes it a federal power.

I continue to be shocked at the sudden desire of people on Free Republic to have the federal government usurp state powers explicitly granted by the constitution to the states.

[Boise3981]

The federal constitution defines government powers. But the federal constitution ALSO defines powers reserved to the states.

The federal constitution says:
"Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress"
It specifically grants the power to the state. It's not a federal power.

They're called exclusive powers. In this case the right to run elections is exclusively a state power: Here, read up: https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/us-government-and-civics/us-gov-foundations/us-gov-relationship-between-the-states-and-the-federal-government/a/relationship-between-the-states-and-the-federal-government-article

[Pagey]

Great Post!