Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

7th Circuit tosses Trump election case, affirming lower court's decision
Citizen Free Press ^ | 12/25/2020

Posted on 12/25/2020 1:07:11 PM PST by SeekAndFind

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-88 next last
To: God_Country_Trump_Guns

I want to ask you a simple question for your response:

If the point IS that Wisconsin already HAS laws that define Indefinite Confinement is ONLY under very FEW isolated conditions - then the Law WASN’T followed when, hundreds of thousands stated, fraudulently, they were IC, and sent in mail-in ballots - how was the Trump team to know how many were wrongly claiming IC BEFORE the election? On what grounds? The harm was done at the TIME of the Election when those votes were recognized and counted.


21 posted on 12/25/2020 1:55:45 PM PST by time4good
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The two things the progressives fear most Trump and law.


22 posted on 12/25/2020 1:57:20 PM PST by Vaduz (women and children to be impacIQ of chimpsted the most.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

This is the nonsensical laches ruling of waiting too long. But you can’t bring a lawsuit until there’s an INJURY.

Example: We can’t sue a driver for driving recklessly until there is an accident as a result of said reckless driving.

Two scenarios:
1) If the state had NOT injured the President, then it would be up to the WI state legislature to clean up its mess, the violation of laws by its other governing bodies.
2) If the state injured the President, then the President has the right to sue.

These courts right now are acting very strangely. And this is not just sour grapes. There is a sense courts are avoiding making tough decisions.

What/Who is pressuring them?


23 posted on 12/25/2020 1:58:31 PM PST by Hostage (Article V)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: God_Country_Trump_Guns

So Counselor Newbie, what inspired you to join Free Republic on November 23, 2020, three weeks after the general election, and proceed to lecture us deplorables here at FR with your expertise in election and con law? Where have you been since January 20, 2016?


24 posted on 12/25/2020 1:59:09 PM PST by 4Runner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The Constitution gives states broad discretion in running elections. So long as states respect Amendments 15, 19, 24 and 26, they basically run the show. Some states allow felons to vote. Some don’t. Some allow mail-in only for qualified absentees, and some allow universal mail-in.

So, WI’s mail-in ballot law and surrounding statutory and executive rules should have been challenged in the legislature first, BEFORE they were enacted. PDJT’s team should have advised him to publicly put pressure on WI’s legislature and governor to revisit this.

But that was not done. The statutory scheme was challenged in WI state court after the fact, and all the way up to WI Supreme Court. PDJT lost.

Challenging election laws in Fed court is very difficult. As I said, states are granted broad discretion in running their election, and unless a Federal or Constitutional basis is found, Fed courts don’t second-guess states.

Here is what the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals said on this topic in this opinion:

“We are not the ultimate authority on Wisconsin law. That responsibility rests with the State’s Supreme Court. Put another way, the errors that the President alleges occurred in the Commission’s exercise of its authority are in the main matters of state law. They belong, then, in the state courts.”

This opinion is well-reasoned, and I don’t think SCOTUS will review, much less overturn.

I don’t want to speculate, but, in my mind, all the pieces of the puzzle point to a well-orchestrated pre-election conspiracy. PDJT was distracted, and various states enacted statutory schemes to grease the wheels for an election defeat. None of PDJT’s staff advised him to use his significant popular pull to block the toxic election laws that were being engineered for the sole purpose of causing his downfall.

The text of the opinion is available at the 7th Circuit’s website. Because of the importance of the case, the opinion is available for free, and you don’t even need an ECF login or password to access it. Here is the opinion:

http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2020/D12-24/C:20-3414:J:Scudder:aut:T:fnOp:N:2635261:S:0


25 posted on 12/25/2020 2:08:49 PM PST by God_Country_Trump_Guns
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Disgusting.


26 posted on 12/25/2020 2:19:35 PM PST by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: time4good

From what I gather, the issue was argued in WI state courts, and went all the way up to WI Supreme Court.

Let me see if I can get my hand on the WI Supreme Court opinion. I will try to give you my thoughts in a couple of hours.


27 posted on 12/25/2020 2:20:10 PM PST by God_Country_Trump_Guns
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Disgusting.


28 posted on 12/25/2020 2:21:23 PM PST by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elcid1970

Maybe they should fear something else


29 posted on 12/25/2020 2:21:31 PM PST by ZULU (Impeach John Roberts for corruption. SOROS IS "SPARTACUS" BOOKER'S LANISTA.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: BEJ

Absolutely


30 posted on 12/25/2020 2:22:01 PM PST by ZULU (Impeach John Roberts for corruption. SOROS IS "SPARTACUS" BOOKER'S LANISTA.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: God_Country_Trump_Guns

Then what is the resolution to this dildmma?


31 posted on 12/25/2020 2:23:30 PM PST by ZULU (Impeach John Roberts for corruption. SOROS IS "SPARTACUS" BOOKER'S LANISTA.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The fix is in. The deep state reveals more of itself every day.


32 posted on 12/25/2020 2:28:03 PM PST by antidemoncrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

Not your court systems, anymore.

Not your government, anymore.

Conquered and thoroughly occupied territory, almost all of it. Your enemies run it all.


33 posted on 12/25/2020 2:29:43 PM PST by veracious (UN=OIC=Islam; USgov may be radically changed, just amend USConstitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: veracious

These evil men.

Pretend we cannot read and understand the law, but they can. Complete lies, damned lies.


34 posted on 12/25/2020 2:31:29 PM PST by veracious (UN=OIC=Islam; USgov may be radically changed, just amend USConstitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: veracious

Unlawful government is no government at all.

We-The-People have no government anymore. No representation in what masquerades for government.

The next steps are in the Declaration of Independence.

Our fathers started revolting over non-representative government. The war actually began when the enemies came for our weapons, at Lexington and Concord.


35 posted on 12/25/2020 2:35:32 PM PST by veracious (UN=OIC=Islam; USgov may be radically changed, just amend USConstitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: time4good; Hostage

OK, so it was easier than I thought.

Turns out, the “indefinitely confined” guidance was enacted on March 25, 2020, and was promptly challenged. On March 31, 2020, the WI Supreme Court overturned the guidance.

So, clearly, the courts were not shy about shooting down unreasonable election procedures. This whole thing about “courts not hearing the case until after the fact” is nonsense. It’s an excuse.

So it appears that after that the WI Supreme Court overturned the guidance, new guidance was put in place.

For whatever reason, the new guidance was NOT challenged until AFTER the election. Why?

Some other thoughts:

After the election, PDJT challenged the various mail-in ballots on four different grounds. The “Indefinite Confinement” challenge was just one ground. PDJT’s challenge went all the way up to WI Supreme Court. PDJT lost on all four challenges.

While we are generally being told that PDJT’s legal team is trying to prove fraud, this is actually false. Almost all court pleadings (including the ones I am discussing here) are seeking to toss ballots on legal technicalities.

The text of the WI Supreme Court opinion that rejected the “Indefinite Confinement” challenge can be found here:

https://law.justia.com/cases/wisconsin/supreme-court/2020/2020ap002038.html


36 posted on 12/25/2020 2:38:37 PM PST by God_Country_Trump_Guns
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: God_Country_Trump_Guns

Great post and thank you.


37 posted on 12/25/2020 2:39:18 PM PST by hawkaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: God_Country_Trump_Guns

> “This whole thing about “courts not hearing the case until after the fact” is nonsense. It’s an excuse.”

AZ, GA, MI, NV, PA are up for fraud. WI is the exception.

Your opinions are devoid of value as your conclusions are half-baked.

Take me off your pong lists. Do not post to me again.


38 posted on 12/25/2020 2:49:04 PM PST by Hostage (Article V)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: God_Country_Trump_Guns
Because of the importance of the case, the opinion is available for free, and you don’t even need an ECF login or password to access it.

Thank you for that. Do you know whether such guest privileges are also granted for other 2020 election cases that have been decided by lower federal courts?

The public at large, myself included are somewhat dismayed at the level of illegality that is occurring in broad daylight. Election officials in various states have openly violated state election statutes. For instance, in Ga the governor seemingly of his own volition set aside election statutes in a way that nicely served the Dem party while his SOS sniffs at suggestions there were polling place violations when those violations were obvious to the public.

Many question how the USSC can easily decide federal or state legislation or behavior is unconstitutional and yet ignore what now seems obvious. It makes sense the court may point to a remedy provided in the Constitution and by federal statutes for resolving (honest) presidential election disagreements, but what we see today is blatant fraud and illegality.

Do you believe there is no remedy at law for such illegal actions?

39 posted on 12/25/2020 2:52:06 PM PST by frog in a pot (The American voter should realize there is nothing democratic about the current Democrat Party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
::::::The court said President Trump had a full opportunity before the election to challenge Wisconsin law.:::::::

This is the Schrödinger's Cat version of "judicial ripeness". If Trump brought the case BEFORE the harm occurred, the same court would have tossed it - it wasn't "ripe". Now they are saying it is too late to complain - "over-ripe" or rotten aka "laches" -- Trump is too late to complain.

This is what happens in corrupt judicial systems.

40 posted on 12/25/2020 3:13:17 PM PST by SERKIT ("Blazing Saddles" explains it all.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-88 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson