PoliticalChic
Diamond Member
1. No.....no courts ever deigned to hear the evidence that the election was stolen........until now.
In the decision written by Chief Justice John Roberts, the court held 6-3 that under the so-called major questions doctrine, judges can strike down federal agency regulations that have substantial economic effects when Congress did not give explicit authority to the agency to make such decisions.
While the court decision involved the Environmental Protection Agency and its efforts to restrain coal-fired electric plants, experts warned it could have vast impact on regulatory agencies.....
2. The ruling reaffirms the Founding Fathers' belief that "any limits on freedom be passed by Congress, not by kings and exchequers and bureaucrats and ministers," J. Christian Adams, a former U.S. Justice Department attorney, told Just the News."
justthenews.com
3. Don't miss what is really going on here, and how it impinges on the theft of the election.
When the discussion is of unelected bureaucracies....it includes state courts, and attorneys general......the ones in Pennsylvania and North Carolina that altered the mode and methods of voting, giving Democrats the election victory....
"The Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear a case that could dramatically change how federal elections are conducted. At issue is a legal theory that would give state legislatures unfettered authority to set the rules for federal elections, free of supervision by the state courts and state constitutions.
The theory, known as the "independent state legislature theory," stems from the election clause in Article I of the Constitution. It says, "The times, places and manner of holding elections for senators and representatives, shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof."
Proponents of the theory argue that that clause gives state legislatures power to regulate federal elections uninhibited by state courts or state constitutions. If a majority of the Supreme Court agrees, that would hamstring state courts, removing judicial oversight of state elections."
www.npr.org
4. "Taken to its extreme, the independent state legislature doctrine could be an earthquake in American election law and fundamentally alter the balance of power within states and provide a pathway to subvert election results," says professor Richard Hasen, an expert on election law from the University of California, Irvine.
5. Thomas is one of four conservatives on the current court who have indicated their support for the independent state legislature theory. The others are Justices Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh. Kavanaugh worked on the legal team supporting then Texas Gov. Bush in the aftermath of the 2000 election. Bush v. Gore, a decision often referred to as a ticket "for this train only," was never cited in any subsequent Supreme Court decision. Until 2020, when Kavanaugh, by then a Supreme Court Justice, cited it in a Wisconsin election case dealing with rules for absentee ballots at the height of the pandemic."
www.npr.org
"After battling bureaucrats throughout presidency, Trump gets last laugh against 'deep state'
Thursday's ruling in the case of West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency significantly confined the ability of unelected federal bureaucrats to make law or policy outside of Congress.In the decision written by Chief Justice John Roberts, the court held 6-3 that under the so-called major questions doctrine, judges can strike down federal agency regulations that have substantial economic effects when Congress did not give explicit authority to the agency to make such decisions.
While the court decision involved the Environmental Protection Agency and its efforts to restrain coal-fired electric plants, experts warned it could have vast impact on regulatory agencies.....
2. The ruling reaffirms the Founding Fathers' belief that "any limits on freedom be passed by Congress, not by kings and exchequers and bureaucrats and ministers," J. Christian Adams, a former U.S. Justice Department attorney, told Just the News."
After battling bureaucrats throughout presidency, Trump gets last laugh against 'deep state'
A Trump-infused Supreme Court reins in federal bureaucracy in historic fashion.
justthenews.com
3. Don't miss what is really going on here, and how it impinges on the theft of the election.
When the discussion is of unelected bureaucracies....it includes state courts, and attorneys general......the ones in Pennsylvania and North Carolina that altered the mode and methods of voting, giving Democrats the election victory....
"The Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear a case that could dramatically change how federal elections are conducted. At issue is a legal theory that would give state legislatures unfettered authority to set the rules for federal elections, free of supervision by the state courts and state constitutions.
The theory, known as the "independent state legislature theory," stems from the election clause in Article I of the Constitution. It says, "The times, places and manner of holding elections for senators and representatives, shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof."
Proponents of the theory argue that that clause gives state legislatures power to regulate federal elections uninhibited by state courts or state constitutions. If a majority of the Supreme Court agrees, that would hamstring state courts, removing judicial oversight of state elections."
Supreme Court to take on controversial election-law case
At issue is a legal theory that would give state legislatures unfettered authority to set the rules for federal elections, free of supervision by state courts and state constitutions.
www.npr.org
4. "Taken to its extreme, the independent state legislature doctrine could be an earthquake in American election law and fundamentally alter the balance of power within states and provide a pathway to subvert election results," says professor Richard Hasen, an expert on election law from the University of California, Irvine.
5. Thomas is one of four conservatives on the current court who have indicated their support for the independent state legislature theory. The others are Justices Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh. Kavanaugh worked on the legal team supporting then Texas Gov. Bush in the aftermath of the 2000 election. Bush v. Gore, a decision often referred to as a ticket "for this train only," was never cited in any subsequent Supreme Court decision. Until 2020, when Kavanaugh, by then a Supreme Court Justice, cited it in a Wisconsin election case dealing with rules for absentee ballots at the height of the pandemic."
Supreme Court to take on controversial election-law case
At issue is a legal theory that would give state legislatures unfettered authority to set the rules for federal elections, free of supervision by state courts and state constitutions.
www.npr.org
Last edited:
