Trump And Republicans Suffer Another Humiliating Defeat In The Supreme Court

[JimH52]

Five months after the presidential election, the Supreme Court said on Monday that it won't take up a case from several Republicans challenging changes to election rules in the battleground state of Pennsylvania.

The unsigned ruling sends yet another message that the court's majority has no interest in relitigating the last election.

Before Monday, the justices had already declined several requests to dive into one of the most litigious elections in history, denying petitions from then-President Donald Trump and other Republicans seeking to overturn election result in multiple states President Joe Biden won.

There were no noted dissents.

Supreme Court tosses out another Republican 2020 election challenge

Five months after the presidential election, the Supreme Court said on Monday that it won't take up a case from several Republicans challenging changes to election rules in the battleground state of Pennsylvania.

www.cnn.com

Maybe they will appeal it to the Knesset, and he will become President of Israel?

The Liar in Chief needs to give it up...YOU LOST DONNIE!.

 

[struth]

Five months after the presidential election, the Supreme Court said on Monday that it won't take up a case from several Republicans challenging changes to election rules in the battleground state of Pennsylvania.

The unsigned ruling sends yet another message that the court's majority has no interest in relitigating the last election.

Before Monday, the justices had already declined several requests to dive into one of the most litigious elections in history, denying petitions from then-President Donald Trump and other Republicans seeking to overturn election result in multiple states President Joe Biden won.

There were no noted dissents.

Supreme Court tosses out another Republican 2020 election challenge

Five months after the presidential election, the Supreme Court said on Monday that it won't take up a case from several Republicans challenging changes to election rules in the battleground state of Pennsylvania.

www.cnn.com

Maybe they will appeal it to the Knesset, and he will become President of Israel?

It's moot at this point...right decision. But the legal question remains unanswered.....so, we'll see what happens in the next election if the Dems cheat again...lesson learned bring the suit sooner

 

[struth]

Five months after the presidential election, the Supreme Court said on Monday that it won't take up a case from several Republicans challenging changes to election rules in the battleground state of Pennsylvania.

The unsigned ruling sends yet another message that the court's majority has no interest in relitigating the last election.

Before Monday, the justices had already declined several requests to dive into one of the most litigious elections in history, denying petitions from then-President Donald Trump and other Republicans seeking to overturn election result in multiple states President Joe Biden won.

There were no noted dissents.

Supreme Court tosses out another Republican 2020 election challenge

Five months after the presidential election, the Supreme Court said on Monday that it won't take up a case from several Republicans challenging changes to election rules in the battleground state of Pennsylvania.

www.cnn.com

Maybe they will appeal it to the Knesset, and he will become President of Israel?

The Liar in Chief needs to give it up...YOU Lour OST DONNIE!.

He didn't bring this lawsuit...did you not read your own link?

 

[struth]

Democrats have made it obvious that they favor voter fraud simply based on the ferocity which they fight against everything that promotes fairness and integrity in our elections. Actually, they're beyond wanting voter fraud. They need voter fraud.

The courts would seem to disagree with you.

The Court didn't say there was no voter fraud...did you not read the links in the OP?

 

[BULLDOG]

Democrats have made it obvious that they favor voter fraud simply based on the ferocity which they fight against everything that promotes fairness and integrity in our elections. Actually, they're beyond wanting voter fraud. They need voter fraud.

The courts would seem to disagree with you.

The Court didn't say there was no voter fraud...did you not read the links in the OP?

The court said they didn't want to waste time on such a goofy claim. I'm not sure you can take much more from that.

 

[struth]

Democrats have made it obvious that they favor voter fraud simply based on the ferocity which they fight against everything that promotes fairness and integrity in our elections. Actually, they're beyond wanting voter fraud. They need voter fraud.

The courts would seem to disagree with you.

The Court didn't say there was no voter fraud...did you not read the links in the OP?

The court said they didn't want to waste time on such a goofy claim. I'm not sure you can take much more from that.

They said it was moot...which is a legal term, meaning nothing they could decide on the case would change anything. Moot.

" Because Federal Courts only have constitutional authority to resolve actual disputes (see Case or Controversy) legal actions cannot be brought or continued after the matter at issue has been resolved, leaving no live dispute for a court to resolve. In such a case, the matter is said to be "moot".

They can't hear the case even if they wanted to.

 

[JimH52]

Five months after the presidential election, the Supreme Court said on Monday that it won't take up a case from several Republicans challenging changes to election rules in the battleground state of Pennsylvania.

The unsigned ruling sends yet another message that the court's majority has no interest in relitigating the last election.

Before Monday, the justices had already declined several requests to dive into one of the most litigious elections in history, denying petitions from then-President Donald Trump and other Republicans seeking to overturn election result in multiple states President Joe Biden won.

There were no noted dissents.

Supreme Court tosses out another Republican 2020 election challenge

Five months after the presidential election, the Supreme Court said on Monday that it won't take up a case from several Republicans challenging changes to election rules in the battleground state of Pennsylvania.

www.cnn.com

Maybe they will appeal it to the Knesset, and he will become President of Israel?

The Liar in Chief needs to give it up...YOU Lour OST DONNIE!.

He didn't bring this lawsuit...did you not read your own link?

MAGA is MAGA is MAGA....STUPID is STUPID is STUPID....

 

[JimH52]

Democrats have made it obvious that they favor voter fraud simply based on the ferocity which they fight against everything that promotes fairness and integrity in our elections. Actually, they're beyond wanting voter fraud. They need voter fraud.

The courts would seem to disagree with you.

The Court didn't say there was no voter fraud...did you not read the links in the OP?

The court said they didn't want to waste time on such a goofy claim. I'm not sure you can take much more from that.

They said it was moot...which is a legal term, meaning nothing they could decide on the case would change anything. Moot.

" Because Federal Courts only have constitutional authority to resolve actual disputes (see Case or Controversy) legal actions cannot be brought or continued after the matter at issue has been resolved, leaving no live dispute for a court to resolve. In such a case, the matter is said to be "moot".

They can't hear the case even if they wanted to.

The MAGA trash had their chances over and over and over...and they had no evidence other than some crazy QAnon theories on suitcases and Dominion voting machines. And that is why many of them are being sued into Oblivion.

 

[struth]

Five months after the presidential election, the Supreme Court said on Monday that it won't take up a case from several Republicans challenging changes to election rules in the battleground state of Pennsylvania.

The unsigned ruling sends yet another message that the court's majority has no interest in relitigating the last election.

Before Monday, the justices had already declined several requests to dive into one of the most litigious elections in history, denying petitions from then-President Donald Trump and other Republicans seeking to overturn election result in multiple states President Joe Biden won.

There were no noted dissents.

Supreme Court tosses out another Republican 2020 election challenge

Five months after the presidential election, the Supreme Court said on Monday that it won't take up a case from several Republicans challenging changes to election rules in the battleground state of Pennsylvania.

www.cnn.com

Maybe they will appeal it to the Knesset, and he will become President of Israel?

The Liar in Chief needs to give it up...YOU Lour OST DONNIE!.

He didn't bring this lawsuit...did you not read your own link?

MAGA is MAGA is MAGA....STUPID is STUPID is STUPID....

What are you even talking about? It's a very interesting question of law that remains unanswered. The people of PA need an answer..I suppose if it happens again, they know to file at the moment it's done.

 

[struth]

Democrats have made it obvious that they favor voter fraud simply based on the ferocity which they fight against everything that promotes fairness and integrity in our elections. Actually, they're beyond wanting voter fraud. They need voter fraud.

The courts would seem to disagree with you.

The Court didn't say there was no voter fraud...did you not read the links in the OP?

The court said they didn't want to waste time on such a goofy claim. I'm not sure you can take much more from that.

They said it was moot...which is a legal term, meaning nothing they could decide on the case would change anything. Moot.

" Because Federal Courts only have constitutional authority to resolve actual disputes (see Case or Controversy) legal actions cannot be brought or continued after the matter at issue has been resolved, leaving no live dispute for a court to resolve. In such a case, the matter is said to be "moot".

They can't hear the case even if they wanted to.

The MAGA trash had their chances over and over and over...and they had no evidence other than some crazy QAnon theories on suitcases and Dominion voting machines. And that is why many of them are being sued into Oblivion.

It appears you have no idea what this lawsuit was about....and seem to be only parroting leftwing propaganda talking points.

Carry on Dembot

 

[Mac1958]

Pretty crazy that this stuff is so far out in left field that even tRump's hand picked justices can't justify it.

The judges are not fools like the voters.

Fortunately a vast majority of adults are able to rise to the occasion and respect and dignify a high office.

Unlike, obviously, orange buffoons.

 

[BULLDOG]

Democrats have made it obvious that they favor voter fraud simply based on the ferocity which they fight against everything that promotes fairness and integrity in our elections. Actually, they're beyond wanting voter fraud. They need voter fraud.

The courts would seem to disagree with you.

The Court didn't say there was no voter fraud...did you not read the links in the OP?

The court said they didn't want to waste time on such a goofy claim. I'm not sure you can take much more from that.

They said it was moot...which is a legal term, meaning nothing they could decide on the case would change anything. Moot.

" Because Federal Courts only have constitutional authority to resolve actual disputes (see Case or Controversy) legal actions cannot be brought or continued after the matter at issue has been resolved, leaving no live dispute for a court to resolve. In such a case, the matter is said to be "moot".

They can't hear the case even if they wanted to.

Isn't that what I just said? It would be a waste of time to entertain what trump et al. wanted to claim.

 

[struth]

Democrats have made it obvious that they favor voter fraud simply based on the ferocity which they fight against everything that promotes fairness and integrity in our elections. Actually, they're beyond wanting voter fraud. They need voter fraud.

The courts would seem to disagree with you.

The Court didn't say there was no voter fraud...did you not read the links in the OP?

The court said they didn't want to waste time on such a goofy claim. I'm not sure you can take much more from that.

They said it was moot...which is a legal term, meaning nothing they could decide on the case would change anything. Moot.

" Because Federal Courts only have constitutional authority to resolve actual disputes (see Case or Controversy) legal actions cannot be brought or continued after the matter at issue has been resolved, leaving no live dispute for a court to resolve. In such a case, the matter is said to be "moot".

They can't hear the case even if they wanted to.

Isn't that what I just said? It would be a waste of time to entertain what trump et al. wanted to claim.

No that's not what you said, or what you said again...reading comp isn't your strong suit

 

[busybee01]

Five months after the presidential election, the Supreme Court said on Monday that it won't take up a case from several Republicans challenging changes to election rules in the battleground state of Pennsylvania. The unsigned ruling sends yet another message that the court's majority has no interest in relitigating the last election.

IDIOT. If you only read your own linked articles, you'd know that Trump's name isn't even on the case and the court's action wouldn't have any impact on the last election. The rule changes made by PA are clearly ILLEGAL and should have been challenged a year ago when they were made, or challenged at the PA Court level.

It is not clearly illegal. You are clueless.

 

[Dana7360]

This means the communists don't have an argument that the court made a finding that the election was legal.

You think all the judges Trump appointed are Communists? Are you quite insane?

The person you replied to doesn't know the honest meaning of the word communist.

 

[busybee01]

What is interesting is that there was no major dissent. Apparently even Thomas thought this was bullshit.

 

[surada]

This means the communists don't have an argument that the court made a finding that the election was legal.

You think all the judges Trump appointed are Communists? Are you quite insane?

The person you replied to doesn't know the honest meaning of the word communist.

Yeah.. much education is pretty slap dash and the kids don't really want it. The don't keep learning after school.. Not much for curiosity or critical thinking. You see it here a lot.. Trump inspires them to be their worst selves.

 

[Crepitus]

Pretty crazy that this stuff is so far out in left field that even tRump's hand picked justices can't justify it.

The judges are not fools like the voters.

Fortunately a vast majority of adults are able to rise to the occasion and respect and dignify a high office.

Unlike, obviously, orange buffoons.

I've got to admit that I didn't expect Coney barrett and Barr O'kavenaugh to do so.

 

[Orangecat]

Thank goodness the court was packed to deny Trump his coup. They need to arrest My-Pillow guy for plotting to overthrow the govt...and over priced pillows.

Again:

You must hold the record for the most idiotic second posts on threads.

 

[Mac1958]

Pretty crazy that this stuff is so far out in left field that even tRump's hand picked justices can't justify it.

The judges are not fools like the voters.

Fortunately a vast majority of adults are able to rise to the occasion and respect and dignify a high office.

Unlike, obviously, orange buffoons.

I've got to admit that I didn't expect Coney barrett and Barr O'kavenaugh to do so.

Yeah, I had my doubts. Nice to see.