Dragonlady /——/ They didn’t take the cases, they didn’t look at the evidence, they refused to consider them. Justice Thomas: SCOTUS Refusal to Hear Pennsylvania Election Cases Is 'Inexplicable'
Last edited:
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
As your article states even if the Pennsylvania supreme court hadn't ruled to allow post marked by election day absentee ballots to be accepted 3 days later, due to the actions of Trump and Post Master General DeJoy's cheating by purposely slowing down mail delivery on election ballots in big cities by reducing staff, removing fast sorting machines, and mail boxes, those ballots received under these PA Supreme court set rules, Joe Biden still would have won.Dragonlady /——/ They didn’t take the cases, they didn’t look at the evidence, they refused to consider them. Justice Thomas: SCOTUS Refusal to Hear Pennsylvania Election Cases Is 'Inexplicable'
Dragonlady /——/ They didn’t take the cases, they didn’t look at the evidence, they refused to consider them. Justice Thomas: SCOTUS Refusal to Hear Pennsylvania Election Cases Is 'Inexplicable'
/—-/ Thanks for making my point. The USSC didn’t examine the evidence or make a ruling. They passed on it.Dragonlady /——/ They didn’t take the cases, they didn’t look at the evidence, they refused to consider them. Justice Thomas: SCOTUS Refusal to Hear Pennsylvania Election Cases Is 'Inexplicable'
The Supreme Court only takes a tiny fraction of requests it gets. One justice's opinion means nothing except there are not 4 justices that want to take up the case.