My fellow Freepers, while I acknowledge the moral righteousness here and also acknowledge that "no standing" is a typical judicial dodge to avoid making controversial rulings, we have to ask ourselves if one state really has standing to sue over how another state runs its business.
Common sense and morality are not necessarily the basis on how The Law works.
Aren’t there federal laws involved in those states actions?
But the other state wasn’t just “conducting its business.” It was breaking the law.
Then who, in reality, —does— have standing?
If they violate the Constitution, and their own laws in such a way as diminish the rights of that State on Federal matters I believe they do ...
Constitution says the states must obey election laws made by their legislators. The 4 states followed election rules not made by their legislators. They operated their elections in an illegal fashion. They violated the Constitution. How does Texas not have standing as a supposed equal state that followed the Constitution
They have standing if states break their own laws and those broken laws affect a national election.
>>we have to ask ourselves if one state really has standing to sue over how another state runs its business.
Consider this, many states want to allocate their electoral votes based on the popular vote, regardless of how the people within their state voted.
To me that certainly opens the door for one state to demand a recount in ALL states (when that “takes effect”). It certainly is on the board.
If some states brazenly run their business outside established law and that brazen conduct is deleterious to other states, then don’t those affected states have standing to sue to stop that illegal conduct by the rogue states?
What about the equal protection clause?
Does that now mean nothing?
States absolutely do.
And Texas was astute enough not to mention voter fraud and to state that their goal was not to change votes or the outcome.
They absolutely have standing.
We have lost state sovereignty since the Civil War.
The left loves to destroy state sovereignty and to grow and empower the federal Leviathan.
Under the federation, if one state does something that harms another state, the harmed state can sue at the USSC for having “equal protection” violated.
In short, if a state cheats and does not follow the USSC and they elect someone fraudulently, that harms other states.
The rogue states violated the USSC by allowing the SoS, AGs, Governors, and Judiciary to ‘essentially’ write election law, which is the province of only the legislature.
By doing so, they allowed fraud which hurt other states by disenfranchising the voters in other states.
This is what Texas was arguing for.
The USSC absolutely should have heard the case, even if they ruled against the 19 states joining the suit.
That they refused to hear the case means that the US Constitution is worthless, states can do what they want.
We are no in a Without Rule of Law (WROL) state.
Conduct your lives and your actions however you want to from this point forward.
There are no rules.
Perhaps the USSC was scared to death that the communists would revolt if they took the case and that resulted in throwing out the fraudulent votes.
What they have done is just unleashed tens of millions of patriots who — up to this point — have prided themselves on being “law-abiding citizens” and supporters of “the rule of law.”
It is now our patriotic duty to refuse to comply, to refuse to abide by all of the unjust, unconstitutional laws that are the result of this unjust, unconstitutional coup that is taking place.
We are now the 1%ers. And not in terms of wealth, in terms of biker outlaws who flout their refusal to comply.
Thank you. A voice reason in a bunch of whiners. Don’t ever, ever quit.
Trump anticipated this. He has a plan. Believe me. Have faith.