Rufus also has the excuse of being French
Election 2020 Election Fraud: Let's face it, this year will be a shitshow
- Thread starter MelancholicMechanicus
- Start date
It's a good thing you didn't then, because statistically at least one lawyer would have probably been on to publicly correct your many misconceptions.
You see, the rules for state v state action are different then person v state or person v person. And under the State v State rules they have standing because Anderson v. Celebrezze decided that "the impact of the votes cast in each State is affected by the votes cast for the various candidates in other States. "
lordmcdeath
Well-known member
What is far more likely to come into play is the time, how the Supreme court manages their time, and how long state v. State cases typically take.
First, the defendants have until 3pm Thursday to respond. With 7 states, the original filer and 6 states filling amiscus briefs in support, and 4 states filling in response that is going to generate a lot of paper.
Even on the fastest turn around that means they can't really start working until Friday. The court doesn't hold hearings on Thursday and Friday, Friday being the day they conference and Thursday is when opinions are generally authored.
Given that I have not been able to find any recorded instance of the Court working weekends, that leaves a Friday to examine all responses and decide at least partial resolution. With no hearings or arguments. This means either decertification or moving the elector date without showing that the law that set them are unconstitutional, essentially setting it aside.
Texas should have filed last Tuesday at minimum. SCOTUS decisions take time. At least a full week and after at least initial arguments. And thats for cases that are being appealed and the actual trial has already been run. Original Court are even longer.
First, the defendants have until 3pm Thursday to respond. With 7 states, the original filer and 6 states filling amiscus briefs in support, and 4 states filling in response that is going to generate a lot of paper.
Even on the fastest turn around that means they can't really start working until Friday. The court doesn't hold hearings on Thursday and Friday, Friday being the day they conference and Thursday is when opinions are generally authored.
Given that I have not been able to find any recorded instance of the Court working weekends, that leaves a Friday to examine all responses and decide at least partial resolution. With no hearings or arguments. This means either decertification or moving the elector date without showing that the law that set them are unconstitutional, essentially setting it aside.
Texas should have filed last Tuesday at minimum. SCOTUS decisions take time. At least a full week and after at least initial arguments. And thats for cases that are being appealed and the actual trial has already been run. Original Court are even longer.
SCOTUS can rush things if need be...
lordmcdeath
Well-known member
A week would be an insane rush in a case like this. A day is...beyond a rush, and that would assume either previously discussed scenario based on the strength of the initial ffillings alone as effectively injuctive relief. One that is effective deciding the case in favor of the plantiffs and the other being moving the electors vote which is set in a statute that isn't being challenged. Which would radically expand the power of the court. Something the conservatives are generally against.
That's not at all what the judgment holds, it doersn't give standing to unrelated third parties that can't point to any parituclary injury. Honestly the fact that you have continued to keep your delusion as the legal failures have continued to collect is astounding.
The campagin is out of time and has had no legal arguments, I wonder what nonsence you guys are going to come up with after the electors vote on December 14th in order to claim "Trump can still win". Probably some nonsence about getting electors to defect or congress to throw out their votes.
It's a pandering lawsuit, Texas has no standing for the case it's bringing. It's going to be put out of it's misery after being left to linger for months during Presidents Biden's Term.
It has perfect standing, by bringing forth the breaking of the constitution to the SCOTUS, which is their job......
Also, you do know the inaugeration can be nulled should it be considered the election was not a valid election right? Which would mean Trump would get a free four years, and Biden would be done.....
If you don't understand I mean within the first couple days at most a week or two, not months down the line.
Last edited:
None of what you said is accurate,
Standing is a legal term of art meaning that only someone impacted by a decision directly can bring a lawsuit like the Trump Campagin or a candidate in the state, Texas is not affected by the way other states conduct their elections and can't bring a lawsuit.
There is no way an inauguration can be annulled once Congress accepted the electoral votes, it just isn't possible given the counstiion gives congress authority for verififying the authentic of state electoral results and not the Supreme Court.
SCOTUS can deem the verification and certification of the electoral results null and void due to the exact case Texas has and the ones that Trumps team is doing.
SCOTUS can say the election is null because of the process for this one had broken the constitution, therefore...
You apparently not understanding what the Judgement is doesn't actually change it being what I said.That's not at all what the judgment holds, it doersn't give standing to unrelated third parties that can't point to any parituclary injury. Honestly the fact that you have continued to keep your delusion as the legal failures have continued to collect is astounding.
The campagin is out of time and has had no legal arguments, I wonder what nonsence you guys are going to come up with after the electors vote on December 14th in order to claim "Trump can still win". Probably some nonsence about getting electors to defect or congress to throw out their votes.
Also your, and others, continued obsession with December 14th as if it actually has bearing on this case is endlessly amusing.
Actually it is, this was explained to you.
Putting aside that any of these court cases winning would be justification for impeachment.
These particular court cases are about the constitutionality of certain states actions, not overturning the presidential election.
Last edited:
Terthna
Professional Lurker
Does anyone think impeachment is anything other than an opportunity for political grandstanding? Face it; the process of impeachment is dead as a viable tool to curtail the abuse of power.
If the courts find X states guilty of violating their constitutions in concerns to the election, and the house doesn't bring impeachment proceedings against Biden/Kamala, the Democrats can say goodby to winning much of anything that's not in a 98% safe area in 2022, 2024, 2026, and possibly even 2028.
Archmagnus
Well-known member
Why? They would just dominion themselves a few million votes.
The Republican party is going to analyze Dominion top to bottom after this election.
So if there's anything to find on that end, it will be found.
CarlManvers2019
Writers Blocked Douchebag
Get rid of as many RINOs as possible along the way
Hell, I think it shouldn’t just be the party but all the voters and supporters getting in on it
lordmcdeath
Well-known member
By all means, get a purge going. I'm sure that will end in nothing but good things.