BREAKING: SCOTUS GIVES GA, MI, WI, AND PA UNTIL THURSDAY DEC 10 AT 3PM TO RESPOND TO SUIT BROUGHT BY TEXAS

Twitter ^ | 8 Dec 20 | Anonymous Patriot

[BlackFemaleArmyColonel]

SCOTUS GIVES GA, MI, WI, AND PA UNTIL THURSDAY DEC 10 AT 3PM TO RESPOND TO SUIT BROUGHT BY TEXAS.

[funfan]

Exactly.

[CottonBall]

Plus the SC only denied the request to stop certification of Pennsylvania’s vote, the case is still active

[pierrem15]

They only refused to grant the injunction: they have not ruled on the merits.

[MrChips]

Very true! Let’s hope and pray for just that.

[funfan]

Yet the rest of the states did the election right and the people are still alive and not dead from covid.

[xrmusn]

the results of which were that there was no spread of the virus as a result of in-person voting.
= = = = = = = =

Why do I have this gnawing feeling that if ‘they’ had anticipated this, there would have been HUNDREDS of cases.

[magna carta]

yes, it would also indirectly discipline states that run junky elections by taking away the electors based on the voting process. That would be true justice.
Instead they get assigned electors based on the current political composition of their state

[pollywog]

I’ve been stocking up on many items also.
I think we are looking for riots in days/weeks , sooner rather than later now.. Scary.

[lula]

The pandemic does not void the constitution

[pierrem15]

The argument is more complicated than that: if the Court allows the state courts and executives in WI, MI and PA to change election requirements when they will, the Constitution's delegation of authority to state legislatures to control the election process is severely weakened, and the legislature's ability to respond to changing circumstances as it sees fit (not state courts or executives) is severely compromised.

In brief, they are saying, "We, as the Texas legislature, ask you to intervene before our own courts, executive and hundreds of lawsuits weaken our ability to hold regular and stable elections."

[StAnDeliver]

"The best thing about this in my opinion is that it takes the case directly to SCOTUS and potentially consolidates the other cases."

Texas cites Republican Party PA at open, and that's the case with Alito's emergency ballot order that PA ignored.

[MrChips]

Well, I do not remember who did the study.

[bitt]

p

[funfan]

I don’t think so. They can rule in favor of Texas and allow the legislators to choose its electors thus upholding the constitution but putting the onus on the state legislators to do the deed.

[pierrem15]

emergency ballot order that PA ignored.

Thanks for reminding us about that: I would wager the PA attorney general is going to have fun being grilled about that.

[steve86]

“This is for all the big Tuna and all the marbles.”

That sounds like a mixed metaphor to me.

[patriotfury]

🇺🇸 "...if this fails the next step is to say,”If one part of the constitution is voided then the whole document is void. Therefore, we are no longer part of this association of states."

"On the face of it", (prima facie), there is no true question you are right.

If this "ajoined suit" were to fail, then the self defined "Contract" (US Constitution) is void, as the agregiously fraudulent, treasonous, global socialist left wing DNC/AFLCIO/CHINA/UNIPARTY dominated states, have committed massive voter fraud, horrifically stolen and disenfranchised their own electorate's likely super majorities (and thereby liberty), and have proactively chosen by globally treasonous FRAUD (paid for by large scale bribes and sex) - to subordinate the entire nation to their treasonous fraud an domination, with the intent of replacing the US Constitution and our freedom with formal socialist government.

[Husker24]

So what can the Supreme Court do here? Throw out those states electors? Wouldn’t Biden still win?

[katieanna]

probably not argue against fraud, rather that Texas has no standing or right ro question another State’s election procedures.
____________________

Yes Texas does have standing because in no case is violating the law part of ‘another state’s election procedure’! These 4 states in question, in violation of Article 2 of the US Constitution and the Equal Protection clause, have disenfranchised the states who KEPT the law.

[DOC44]

MAIN MOTION FILLED WITH SUPREME COURT

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163048/20201208132827887_TX-v-State-ExpedMot%202020-12-07%20FINAL.pdf?fbclid=IwAR15h3n_Co7nGEG8rBLkb_pqQ7aaUf3-nINUh5HpAx0Uf2FSOKYjsLZ1nDo