Texas Sues Four States in SCOTUS

just wondering, are you including the trailer load from Bethpage to Harrisburg?

cuz if you are, call the fbi, they are trying to track them Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

It's like tracking down Bigfoot ....or tracking down a statement where Trump tells the truth!

This publicity stunt by Paxton (and now Trump) is a legal mess for a number of reasons.

It's full of mistakes and errors... like the one in Pennsylvania that the court threw out with extreme predjudice.

And it's a last second stunt by one of the country's biggest political criminals. OK, two, if you count Twitler.

Nobody is amused, except the proud boys of ECCIE.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/202...biden-n1250383

Famed liberal lawyer John Cornin say he can’t imagine that Texas could tell other states how to run their elections.

This publicity stunt by Paxton (and now Trump) is a legal mess for a number of reasons.

It's full of mistakes and errors... like the one in Pennsylvania that the court threw out with extreme predjudice.

And it's a last second stunt by one of the country's biggest political criminals. OK, two, if you count Twitler.

Nobody is amused, except the proud boys of ECCIE.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/202...biden-n1250383 Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

nbc news-----DEBUNKED

Paxton like the trump cartel needs a pardon. It's not that difficult people. Unless you're an ignorant clueless redneck

the four defendant states have been ordered by the scotus to respond in detail to the texas filing

it will be interesting to see how this plays out

louisiana, arkansas, alabama, florida, kentucky, mississippi, south carolina, & south dakota (oh yeah kristi noem) had all announced that they will be joining texas

not sure if they actually have yet or even ultimately will, but no matter Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

just heard that 17 states joined texas. that's 8 we know. 9 nine more joining?

here we go: Indiana, Kansas, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Utah, West Virginia

Id be surprised if they hear it.

those judges are in the "nothing to see mood".

just heard that 17 states joined texas. that's 8 we know. 9 nine more joining? Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

You heard correctly.

Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 (2000)

Because it is evident that any recount seeking to meet 3 U. S. C. § 5's December 12 "safe-harbor" date would be unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause, the Florida Supreme Court's judgment ordering manual recounts is reversed. The Clause's requirements apply to the manner in which the voting franchise is exercised. Having once granted the right to vote on equal terms, Florida may not, by later arbitrary and disparate treatment, value one person's vote over that of another. See, e. g., Harper v. Virginia Bd. of Elections, 383 U. S. 663, 665. The recount mechanisms implemented in response to the state court's decision do not satisfy the minimum requirement for nonarbitrary treatment of voters. The record shows that the standards for accepting or rejecting contested ballots might vary not only from county to county but indeed within a single county from one recount team to another. In addition, the recounts in three counties were not limited to so-called undervotes but extended to all of the ballots. Furthermore, the actual process by which the votes were to be counted raises further concerns because the court's order did not specify who would recount the ballots. Where, as here, a court orders a statewide remedy, there must be at least some assurance that the rudimentary requirements of equal treatment and fundamental fairness are satisfied. The State has not shown that its procedures include the necessary safeguards. Upon due consideration of the difficulties identified to this point, it is obvious that the recount cannot be conducted in compliance with the requirements of equal protection and due process without substantial additional work.

You should read the whole opinion. The remedy requested by the states is in violation of the constitution. So it won’t be granted. Electors will be provided on Monday and the electoral college will choose the next president. It’ll be Joe Biden in case you were confused.

Further the dispute in Bush v Gore was specific to the State of Florida. Not a difference in how votes were counted across different states. The constitution specifically delegates to the states the method of elections. Hence, one state cannot complain about how another state holds its elections. The most recent cases from the SC pretty well establish that states can conduct their elections as they please including shortening or lengthening time frames for early voting and mail voting.

You heard correctly.

Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 (2000) Originally Posted by LexusLover

Hey Georgie Zimmerman lover....are you trying to say that the Szc will overturn the election results in these 4 states?

gotta love an idiot talking about constitutional issues

its hilarious

in other news... maudro allies win 91% of all congressional seats in Venezuela in a safe, secure and fair election

gotta love an idiot talking about constitutional issues

its hilarious

in other news... maudro allies win 91% of all congressional seats in Venezuela in a safe, secure and fair election Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

I’ve been called worse. Won’t matter because I’ll soon be called right.

All of you hoping and praying that the SC will overturn the election are in for another bit of heartbreak.

I’ll be laughing and letting you know that We Made America Great Again.

frankly I'd be surprised if the sc had the guts to send it back to the state legislatures

and my heart has been steeled against breakage for a very long time

gotta love an idiot talking about constitutional issues

its hilarious

in other news... maudro allies win 91% of all congressional seats in Venezuela in a safe, secure and fair election Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

I wouldn't go so far as to say you're loved...

Can I put you down as another Trump Constitutional Scholar who thinks the SC will side with the Texas AG on Constitutional grounds? Or are you going to stick with your gut on this question of law?




.

I wouldn't go so far as to say you're loved...

Can I put you down as another Trump Constitutional Scholar who thinks the SC will side with the Texas AG on Constitutional grounds? Or are you going to stick with your gut on this question of law?

Originally Posted by WTF

don't you have writers? you need to fire them

so lame

I’ve been called worse. Won’t matter because I’ll soon be called right.

All of you hoping and praying that the SC will overturn the election are in for another bit of heartbreak.

I’ll be laughing and letting you know that We Made America Great Again. Originally Posted by 1blackman1

Who's we?