Legal experts: No, Alto and Thomas did not "dissent" in the Texas case

[pyetro]

If you hear a conservative claim that "the decision was 7-2" in this case, explain to him/her that this isn't true:

 

[Lakhota]

If you hear a conservative claim that "the decision was 7-2" in this case, explain to him/her that this isn't true:

Correct. It was a 9-0 smackdown!

 

[justinacolmena]

Guns are banned. We knew that already. Fucking Democrat assholes on the bench. All nine of them. Graduated with full Democrat honors from Democrat Ivy League institutions, in good standing with the local Democrat bar association, having advanced progressive Democrat causes in court and qualified to sit on the highest bench of a Democrat institution of Democrat law.

 

[Rogue AI]

They didn't dissent but made clear there are issues that can still be heard.

 

[Erinwltr]

If you hear a conservative claim that "the decision was 7-2" in this case, explain to him/her that this isn't true:

It's the Conservative Court that you all have been pissing your stained pantiz over since Reagan. What's the problem? Rule of Law?

 

[Skylar]

If you hear a conservative claim that "the decision was 7-2" in this case, explain to him/her that this isn't true:

My take is that it was 7-2 against standing and 9-0 that the complaint was unworthy of any relief.

 

[White 6]

If you hear a conservative claim that "the decision was 7-2" in this case, explain to him/her that this isn't true:

My take is that it was 7-2 against standing and 9-0 that the complaint was unworthy of any relief.

All we know for certain is there was not 4 justices willing to hear the case and the most favorable one I heard of said he favored hearing the argument, but still not in favor of granting the remedy.

 

[flacaltenn]

If you hear a conservative claim that "the decision was 7-2" in this case, explain to him/her that this isn't true:

Wasn't a dissent. It was an important explanation that blew right thru the canyon between your ears.

The explanation was -- they did NOT agree that the SupCt couldn't take the case on the pretense technicality that one state didn't have standing to challenge NATIONAL election results. They cited precedence for why that "excuse" about "standing was faulty. But then they explained that even if the case HAD been taken -- ANY REMEDY for damages (and there are damages and violations of State and FEDERAL Constitution) -- any remedy can really only come from the various State Legislatures that got screwed by activist courts and the Exec branch of their states.. Those entities ILLEGALLY changed law that only the STATEHOUSES can legally and constitutionally touch..

It's THEIR negligence that ALLOWED these illegal, election stealing rules to become embedded. And now THEY have sole power to assert their powers and remedy them..

Once the mail ballots were unpacked and stripped of chain of custody in terms of postmarks and signatures -- NO court can "repair" that damage. The theft is on the books for good.

 

[Rogue AI]

Likely they will take on a lingering case later, so as not to disenfranchise anyone. If they do nothing, our elections mean nothing. Almost half the states acknowledged they don't have confidence in the results. That's not a legacy the court wants.

 

[Skylar]

Likely they will take on a lingering case later, so as not to disenfranchise anyone. If they do nothing, our elections mean nothing. Almost half the states acknowledged they don't have confidence in the results. That's not a legacy the court wants.

Or....Texas' petition was obvious pseudo-legal horseshit.

Never discount the possibility that you're just wrong. Especially when the weight of evidence so strongly suggests it.

 

[Rogue AI]

Likely they will take on a lingering case later, so as not to disenfranchise anyone. If they do nothing, our elections mean nothing. Almost half the states acknowledged they don't have confidence in the results. That's not a legacy the court wants.

Or....Texas' petition was obvious pseudo-legal horseshit.

Never discount the possibility that you're just wrong. Especially when the weight of evidence so strongly suggests it.

Black letter law in these states suggests otherwise.

 

[Erinwltr]

If you hear a conservative claim that "the decision was 7-2" in this case, explain to him/her that this isn't true:

Wasn't a dissent. It was an important explanation that blew right thru the canyon between your ears.

The explanation was -- they did NOT agree that the SupCt couldn't take the case on the pretense technicality that one state didn't have standing to challenge NATIONAL election results. They cited precedence for why that "excuse" about "standing was faulty. But then they explained that even if the case HAD been taken -- ANY REMEDY for damages (and there are damages and violations of State and FEDERAL Constitution) -- any remedy can really only come from the various State Legislatures that got screwed by activist courts and the Exec branch of their states.. Those entities ILLEGALLY changed law that only the STATEHOUSES can legally and constitutionally touch..

It's THEIR negligence that ALLOWED these illegal, election stealing rules to become embedded. And now THEY have sole power to assert their powers and remedy them..

Once the mail ballots were unpacked and stripped of chain of custody in terms of postmarks and signatures -- NO court can "repair" that damage. The theft is on the books for good.

Total BS. It's a fucking Conservative Court. What was the ruling?

 

[Erinwltr]

Likely they will take on a lingering case later, so as not to disenfranchise anyone. If they do nothing, our elections mean nothing. Almost half the states acknowledged they don't have confidence in the results. That's not a legacy the court wants.

Or....Texas' petition was obvious pseudo-legal horseshit.

Never discount the possibility that you're just wrong. Especially when the weight of evidence so strongly suggests it.

So true. I'm a back seat driver and even I saw this coming. Good thing our imperfect court system still works.

 

[Erinwltr]

Guns are banned. We knew that already. Fucking Democrat assholes on the bench. All nine of them. Graduated with full Democrat honors from Democrat Ivy League institutions, in good standing with the local Democrat bar association, having advanced progressive Democrat causes in court and qualified to sit on the highest bench of a Democrat institution of Democrat law.

Having said that, what is you alternative?

 

[Skylar]

Likely they will take on a lingering case later, so as not to disenfranchise anyone. If they do nothing, our elections mean nothing. Almost half the states acknowledged they don't have confidence in the results. That's not a legacy the court wants.

Or....Texas' petition was obvious pseudo-legal horseshit.

Never discount the possibility that you're just wrong. Especially when the weight of evidence so strongly suggests it.

So true. I'm a back seat driver and even I saw this coming. Good thing our imperfect court system still works.

Everyone not glued to OAN or NewMaxTV saw this coming. The petition was just awful. It was so obviously flawed, so obviously outside of the scope of Texas' authority, that its outcome was inevitable.

Yet our conservative friends NEVER saw this coming. They were poleaxed and blind sided, certain that Trump was playing more '3-dimensional chess' and all his failures up to this point were merely clever positioning for him to make his final, victorious move.

.....so, yeah. They're not having a great night.

 

[Skylar]

Guns are banned. We knew that already. Fucking Democrat assholes on the bench. All nine of them. Graduated with full Democrat honors from Democrat Ivy League institutions, in good standing with the local Democrat bar association, having advanced progressive Democrat causes in court and qualified to sit on the highest bench of a Democrat institution of Democrat law.

Having said that, what is you alternative?

Justina is a foreign troll. He's constantly trying to incite violence among Americans. I'd give him as much consideration as you would any Russian disinfo agent.

Tell them to fuck off and enjoy their shitty vodka.

 

[Erinwltr]

Likely they will take on a lingering case later, so as not to disenfranchise anyone. If they do nothing, our elections mean nothing. Almost half the states acknowledged they don't have confidence in the results. That's not a legacy the court wants.

Or....Texas' petition was obvious pseudo-legal horseshit.

Never discount the possibility that you're just wrong. Especially when the weight of evidence so strongly suggests it.

So true. I'm a back seat driver and even I saw this coming. Good thing our imperfect court system still works.

Everyone not glued to OAN or NewMaxTV saw this coming. The petition was just awful. It was so obviously flawed, so obviously outside of the scope of Texas' authority, that its outcome was inevitable.

Yet our conservative friends NEVER saw this coming. They were poleaxed and blind sided, certain that Trump was playing more '3-dimensional chess' and all his failures up to this point were merely clever positioning for him to make his final, victorious move.

.....so, yeah. They're not having a great night.

"poleaxed" I looked that up.

It's his last grifter move going out of the WH.

Trump’s post-election cash grab floods funds to new PAC

The Trump operation raised $207.5 million since Election Day, including a hefty chunk to a new leadership PAC Trump formed in November.

www.politico.com

 

[Skylar]

Likely they will take on a lingering case later, so as not to disenfranchise anyone. If they do nothing, our elections mean nothing. Almost half the states acknowledged they don't have confidence in the results. That's not a legacy the court wants.

Or....Texas' petition was obvious pseudo-legal horseshit.

Never discount the possibility that you're just wrong. Especially when the weight of evidence so strongly suggests it.

So true. I'm a back seat driver and even I saw this coming. Good thing our imperfect court system still works.

Everyone not glued to OAN or NewMaxTV saw this coming. The petition was just awful. It was so obviously flawed, so obviously outside of the scope of Texas' authority, that its outcome was inevitable.

Yet our conservative friends NEVER saw this coming. They were poleaxed and blind sided, certain that Trump was playing more '3-dimensional chess' and all his failures up to this point were merely clever positioning for him to make his final, victorious move.

.....so, yeah. They're not having a great night.

"poleaxed" I looked that up.

It's his last grifter move going out of the WH.

Trump’s post-election cash grab floods funds to new PAC

The Trump operation raised $207.5 million since Election Day, including a hefty chunk to a new leadership PAC Trump formed in November.

www.politico.com

Yeah, but it was an incompetent, shitty game.

The election wasn't particularly close. Trump and his allies have a record of essentially perfect failure, losing over 50 cases. Their arguments were incompetent shit, with Trump's legal team never once in court even ALLEGING fraud ever occurred as part of their legal arguments.

And Trump's presentation was just awful. Gulliani giving a press conference next to a porn store after mistaking a landscaping company for the 4 Seasons hotel?

Or quite literally *melting* on camera?

Declaring himself a 'cybersecurity expert' before insisting that poll worker's homes be searched for 'evidence of USB ports'?

Trump's legal team arguing that Hugo "I've been dead since 2013" Chavez threw the 2020 election to Biden?

Its been a dipshit rodeo of ever changing lawyers, contradicting arguments, half baked conspiracy batshit, legal incompetence, poor messaging, and comic misunderstandings of even basic concepts. All in public. This has been on of the most inept legal efforts in modern political history.

And it all lands at Donald Trump's feet.

 

[Billy000]

Guns are banned. We knew that already. Fucking Democrat assholes on the bench. All nine of them. Graduated with full Democrat honors from Democrat Ivy League institutions, in good standing with the local Democrat bar association, having advanced progressive Democrat causes in court and qualified to sit on the highest bench of a Democrat institution of Democrat law.

Lol do you notice how you’re quickly running out of people who you don’t call RINOs?

 

[Billy000]

They didn't dissent but made clear there are issues that can still be heard.

Lol um okay. Biden will still be inaugurated on 1/20.