Message from @Trista
Discord ID: 787175177297068033
But the feds cant step on states rights on a whim nor can other states stomp on each other
Wasn't Texas suing because each of those four states acted unconstitutionally because a member of the executive/judicial branch modified voter laws without the involvement of the legislative branch? It seems fair that another state should be able to step in and call them on it.
The issue is not states stepping on stages. The issue is the non legislative branches stepping on the legislative branch in the states in question.
State supreme courts didnt think so their case was weak
Courts are not politically impartial even though they are supposed to be.
@Trista, you just advanced to level 1!
They also asked for a staggering remedy which steps on more checks and balances doing harm to citizens rights uninvolved in the actions
Also, had the relief TX wanted been granted, it would not necessarily overturn a win for Biden. The legislative bodies of the states could have chose to send a slate for Biden.
Very important message to patriots https://twitter.com/tracybeanz/status/1337548142196129792?s=12
🤷 not up to them up to voters
No, it actually is not. Most states have set up a system where they use the voters votes to determine the slate. But the legislators having the power to choose the electors is part of the checks and balances. If there is an issue with the votes, they are the closest to the people to get to the bottom of what happened. If they make a choice that doesn't reflect thier constituents, they will damage thier career.
All the states choose electors by the vote. It's not a coincidence we built protections into the system to stop legislatures from exercising that power after they saw the results of the election. State electors shouldn't be flipping elections based on junk accusations that cannot stand up to cursory court proceedings. Congressional bodies can absolutely put blocks in place on themselves and they have to follow the rules to change that.
They voluntarily made it so it takes 2/3 in some states to do this. They voluntarily made it so it takes governors permission in others. This was to protect us from future Trumps.
I think we will have to agree to disagree here. Had Scotus taken the case, they could have clarified the constitution on this issue.
They were never going to pickup a case like this. It was filled with crazy witnesses and absurdities and misinformation even after they got past states bullying other states on their own laws.
By the way, I am not a supporter of Trump nor Biden. I just want to be clear on that.
by not taking the case they clarified that there is no constitutional issue
🤷 I dont like either of them.
I think this will still be done, just not with the Texas case
No, they dropped it on standing, not the constitutional issue. Two justices dissented and said they believed it had standing.
The constitution issue at hand is rather the governor's, courts, and secretary of state have the authority bro change election laws without the input of the stat legislators.
The scotus was never going to save Trump. He thinks they are his minions. They should listen to the federal courts.
standing as per the constitution: "The State of Texas’s motion for leave to file a bill of complaint is denied for lack of standing under Article III of the Constitution. Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections."
suppose they rule on that narrow issue that extending the deadline past the day of election was unconstitutional according to the US Constitution, then the result is to throw out the votes that arrived after election day, guess what the result would be ... Biden wins PA. Just look on PA website where it says "These vote totals do not include any votes from mail ballots received between 8 p.m. on election day and 5 p.m. the following Friday." https://www.electionreturns.pa.gov/
@Trista this was actually thrown out of US District court I believe ... let me find links for you
I'm not sure where you are getting the issue of extending past the day of the election. Obviously I did not read all the briefs, but I have followed this via several sources that oppose each other and I skimmed several of the briefs.
@Trista, you just advanced to level 2!
Gish galloping on the scotus isnt going to work
Gish galloping? I haven't heard that before.
It's an argumentation style where you take a bunch of claims and smash them together even if individually many of them have little or no merit
well this is the main PA one that was appealed all the way to the Supreme Court and they refused to hear it letting a lower US District court ruling stand https://www.npr.org/2020/12/08/944230517/supreme-court-rejects-gop-bid-to-reverse-pennsylvania-election-results
This comment by Trump was not concerning Texas case https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1337494507756072961?s=21
What’s your proof
His track record
Wdym
Sorry, it is getting hard to track all of these cases. LOL. I'm checking out for the evening, but I've enjoyed having a real discussion. I still disagree at this point, but I will look at that case.
Wtf is up with that wisdom and courage nonsense?
I swear this lady is smoking kraken rather than releasing one