Lib media posting oral arguments to the Supreme Court on YouTube about mail in ballots that begs the question: Why bother?

[Mac-7]

This is via far left PBS

But lib Forbes and CNN are posting video on YouTube also

And probably others

My reaction is why bother with oral or even written arguments to the SC since the black robes walk on water and already know everything there is to know?

The decisions of 5 justices become law for 320 million Americans and are considered sacrosanct

So why engage in a Kabuki Dance of oral arguments as if the issue was ever in doubt?

 

[JoeB131]

This is via far left PBS

But lib Forbes and CNN are posting video on YouTube also

And probably others

My reaction is why bother with oral or even written arguments to the SC since the black robes walk on water and already know everything there is to know?

The decisions of 5 justices become law for 320 million Americans and are considered sacrosanct

So why engage in a Kabuki Dance of oral arguments as if the issue was ever in doubt?

The issue shouldn't be in doubt, because constiuencies always counted late ballots that were postmarked before the election.

This is just more Repuke attempts at voter suppression.

 

[Mac-7]

The issue shouldn't be in doubt, because constiuencies always counted late ballots that were postmarked before the election.

This is just more Repuke attempts at voter suppression.

Not surprisingly you missed the entire point of this thread

If the black robes are all-knowing and infallible they already know how they are going to rule

And it should be a 9-0 decision

 

[JoeB131]

Not surprisingly you missed the entire point of this thread

If the black robes are all-knowing and infallible they already know how they are going to rule

And it should be a 9-0 decision

Um, no. I don't think you understand how our system works at all.

Then again, you are a Trump supporter and probably failed basic civics.

 

[Mac-7]

Um, no. I don't think you understand how our system works at all.

Then again, you are a Trump supporter and probably failed basic civics.

I understand clearly

You are the one who still believes in Santa Claus

 

[rightwinger]

States should decide their voting procedures.

 

[DGS49]

The lawyers presenting cases for both sides - and often interested third parties - provide legal briefs to the Justices long before oral arguments. The Justices and their clerks are well aware of what they contain and what the arguments are. But written briefs are strategic documents, promoting one side of the argument and either ignoring, obscuring, or misrepresenting the other side.

Oral arguments give the Justices the opportunity to explore the weaknesses of the briefs, challenge the things that are B.S., and force the lawyers to flesh out the case.

The system works OK, and provides a bit of transparency for the Press and the interested public.

What's the problem?

 

[westwall]

States should decide their voting procedures.

They should also adhere to them. Amazingly enough, they broke their own laws.

How can you trust anyone who does that?

 

[rightwinger]

They should also adhere to them. Amazingly enough, they broke their own laws.

How can you trust anyone who does that?

During a worldwide pandemic, rules were modified so that in person voting was not required

2020 had the most voters in history and was the safest and most secure election in history.