I read the filing. So did SCOTUS. They didn't want the stink on them so they dumped it for the easiest of a dozen reasons.

@james j After all, the Democratic Party remains the party of segregation, racism, sexism, and all other forms of prejudice - as it always has been.

The State Supreme Court overrode her order on the basis of laches, which SCOTUS didn’t even accept lmfao

Laches has nothing to do with merits

The respondents claimed laches barred Texas, too, a claim SCOTUS did not support

These junk cases aren't the courts' problem. Failed.

SCOTUS did not rule on the merits. Fact.

It ruled on procedure.

That doesn't make the merits anything at all.

@james j No, the Texas case was Not thrown out unanimously. It was a 2-7 split because they are cowards and Roberts is a traitor.

*FACT

The south democrats , the conservatives of their time @Whithers remember a party is just a shell for values. Back then the democrats were the banner the south flew under then they started shifting up north and started marketing to the north and the republicans started to appeal to the south more. So now you have the democrats inhabited by the north with liberal values and republicans inhabited by the south with conservative valuss

@Zuluzeit cases?

https://rumble.com/vbu6xh-election-night-errors-how-did-that-happen.html

Courts have been throwing out cases mostly on procedural grounds. The PA judge commented on the merits, not procedure, saying it would succeed, if judged on the merits, which SCOTUS refused to do

look its enuf, you are trying to revise history it doesnt work

I always forget to end statements with 'fact' so people know it's indisputable.

It is indisputable by reason of their writing.

@james j All of that recital is bull. A lie.

@Whithers no the two judges just said they would hear the case but grant no remedies . It was constitutional formality. They even said they would grant to remedy

> @Zuluzeit cases?
@busillis there have been over 50, no?

Fact

Not having actionable Damages is not Procedure.

i think smaller government is a good thing. the less the supreme court intervenes and lets states manage their own affairs, the less government micromanaging we have. i think states should have the power to do things in the best interests of their people. if my state govt isn’t taking care of me, i should elect better representatives so my will is represented.

That is commentary on standing.

@Whithers why does the south fly the battle flag of the confederates who were all southern Democrats?

If DJT brought the lawsuit in his personal capacity, he would have standing and be rightly a target of these damages

@AOH_Assassin and then case was thrown out on its merits as the remedy was ridiculous ask

Garbage cases submitted by whack jobs and criminals. The appeal is making more sense now.

Nope. No commentary on the merits.

https://youtu.be/YL-H-zAMCFE

@vfc alcutta, you just advanced to level 6!

@x96petersen1 No. Size of government is irrelevant. Government must be sufficient to govern. The small big argument is bull. States controlled by foreign powers and interests should not be left to their own devices and cannot act in the best interests of any American.

they didnt even look at the merits of the case from what i read

They looked. Didn't comment on them.

Not offering instantaneous relief does not mean no merits. The court simply didn’t want to get involved.

idk if that accurate but thats what was reported

He would not have Original Jurisdiction in the Supreme Court.

The Kraken... Can we finally put that to bed? For Spyder to end up being a former Army mechanic that was not able to complete entry level Intelligence training is just stunning. It's basically this:

I am not saying he start with SCOTUS...

@Zuluzeit is a reputed gas lighter and long time friend of cornpop, so @Zuluzet#7399 is a bad dude by extension.