December 11, America’s Other Day of Infamy – When the US Supreme Court Abdicated Its Responsibilities

[kyzr]

“The State of Texas’s motion for leave to file a bill of complaint is denied for lack of standing under Article III of the Constitution,” the Supreme Court’s order reads.
Please, try to be more educated next time.

OK, thx. I never saw the official reason. I saw other entity's suits had "standing" issues, but never a State.

 

[notmyfault2020]

.

hundreds of data scientists and mathematicians, including over 300 individuals who had formerly worked for one of our national security agencies, came out publicly, in unison, and stated that the results of the election were statistically and scientifically impossible apart from widespread fraud.

 

[Marener]

OK, thx. I never saw the official reason. I saw other entity's suits had "standing" issues, but never a State.

A voter of a state has standing to sue the state if they think that the laws of the state conflicted with the constitution.

Many did. Some even won. Lots of them lost.

The idea that only state legislatures can effect any part of elections is moronic and unlikely to succeed before SCOTUS.

Even in Texas, the governor changed election laws to facilitate voting. These morons were guilty of the same thing they accused other states of doing.

 

[bodecea]

Tissue?

Someone a paid shill for Gateway Pundit?

 

[notmyfault2020]

A voter of a state has standing to sue the state if they think that the laws of the state conflicted with the constitution.

Many did. Some even won. Lots of them lost.

The idea that only state legislatures can effect any part of elections is moronic and unlikely to succeed before SCOTUS.

Even in Texas, the governor changed election laws to facilitate voting. These morons were guilty of the same thing they accused other states of doing.

you don't appear to have actually read the US Constitution

figures

 

[bodecea]

.

hundreds of data scientists and mathematicians, including over 300 individuals who had formerly worked for one of our national security agencies, came out publicly, in unison, and stated that the results of the election were statistically and scientifically impossible apart from widespread fraud.

Where is your link?

 

[bodecea]

There was no coup attempted, there was a coup.. Congress gave the election to the fraudsters by refusing to investigate it. That was the coup.

You support a FAILED coup. You are a FAILURE who was too afraid to even participate.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Look at the bright side, the Gator will be one of the first to die.

You making a list and checking it twice?

 

[berg80]

Inncorect,
Section 4 Congress
The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.

Article I Section 4 | Constitution Annotated | Library of Congress​

It never fails that when a MAGAnut makes a reference to Article I Sec. 4 they always leave off the part where it says Congress holds the ultimate authority over elections.

The independent state legislature theory runs contrary to the constitutional text, history, practice, and precedent. The framers famously distrusted state lawmakers, so much so that when they drafted the Elections Clause, they insisted that Congress retain the ultimate power to set the rules for federal elections. The framers would not have established — and indeed did not establish — a regime that would permit state legislatures to regulate federal elections without the ordinary checks and balances that apply to state lawmaking power. State practice, from the country’s founding to today, also refutes the theory. For example, many framers — including James Madison — voted to adopt state constitutions that regulated federal elections, as North Carolina’s does today.

On top of this overwhelming historical evidence, the theory makes no sense: it would be absurd for a state legislature to be allowed to violate the very state constitution that created it. Other problems doom the theory, as an avalanche of recent scholarship demonstrates. For these reasons, the Supreme Court has repeatedly rejected the theory for over a century, including as recently as 2015 and 2019.
Moore v. Harper, Explained

 

[Lastamender]

You support a FAILED coup. You are a FAILURE who was too afraid to even participate.

The coup took place when Congress voted not to investigate the election. Those protestors had nothing to do with installing an illegitimate president. That is all on Congress.

 

[Marener]

you don't appear to have actually read the US Constitution

figures

I can almost guarantee that I know more about this idea than you.

 

[kyzr]

.

hundreds of data scientists and mathematicians, including over 300 individuals who had formerly worked for one of our national security agencies, came out publicly, in unison, and stated that the results of the election were statistically and scientifically impossible apart from widespread fraud.

Got a link for that?

 

[westwall]

You making a list and checking it twice?

Nah, you dumbasses are your own worst enemy. When society collapses, so will you.

 

[MAGA Macho Man]

You missed the point.

Some states ILLEGALLY changed the election rules. That's un-Constitutional. I know dems don't understand "The Law".

All true. They violated the constitution.

 

[notmyfault2020]

Where is your link?

geez.. the link is in the OP

 

[notmyfault2020]

Got a link for that?

for crying out loud

the link is in the OP

I guess at least 2 recent posters here did not actually READ OP

 

[notmyfault2020]

The coup took place when Congress voted not to investigate the election. Those protestors had nothing to do with installing an illegitimate president. That is all on Congress.

looks like it is on Congress AND Scotus

 

[BlindBoo]

We'll never know if fraud was there or not now, will we? Its swept under the rug.

Nope, the court ruled on those and fraud was not even looked for because it was never a question with challenges to the rule changes or administrative laws. Some reverted back to the previous rule or no rule, and some were changed by their states legislature.

 

[berg80]

you don't appear to have actually read the US Constitution

figures

These folks have.

A Guide to Recent Scholarship on the ‘Independent State Legislature Theory’​

A Guide to Recent Scholarship on the ‘Independent State Legislature Theory’

The latest scholarship demonstrates the flaws and the dangers of this radical theory.

www.brennancenter.org

 

[Harpy Eagle]

for crying out loud

the link is in the OP

I guess at least 2 recent posters here did not actually READ OP

But the OP does not give a link to them doing it.

I get that for you the GWP saying it is so is more than enough, but not all of us feel that way.