What's the violation of Constitution?

@Dedkraken Michigan Election Law Act 116 of 1954 Sec. 759 paragraph (3) lists three ways how applications for absent voter ballots may be made. IMO the election laws were not violated by the voters of Michigan using the applications provided by the MI Sec of State, so the votes from those ballots were placed constitutionally. I do think MI Sec of State violated the election laws distributing the applications and should face penalties for that violation. The process Michigan used that did violate their election laws is allowing absentee ballots applications via their website without signatures. The votes received from the ballots requested on the website were placed in violation of Michigan’s election laws and should not be counted. Sadly, I am one of those voters who requested their ballot without providing my signature via the website.

Which of those questions does that have to do with?

i was responding to your “what’s the violation of constitution” comment. sorry new here. can’t figure out how to follow different conversations!!

California has multiple layouts for secession from the coastal cities, I even saw a map with California split 6 ways.

The US Constitution gives the express power of the state legislature to designate the electors. not a member of the executive branch

It takes practice with Discord sometimes

To be honest it might help California if they split as there is so much difference between the big cities needs and the rural parts of the state.

If your splitting Cali Texas needs to split to offset those extra very liberal senators they would get

But I mean Congress can delegate things. Congress has say the power of the purse. If they write a law like defense spending bill and declare what they want to spend on what and turn it over to the POTUS to administer that spending it's legit. They can pass another law to modify that later.

In this case they laid out the rules they wanted to see followed to collect vote tallies and certify. This isnt unconstitutional the power is in there to design the system and they did.

But it is when those things are not followed

Gotcha you can hold down on a comment to reply to it. The Constitutionality of voting rules is a bit different than the power of state Congress over elector selection once they have the vote totals. I wasnt quite sure because what you said was kind of in line with both things

They were followed they got the certified results from each county to the state and then signed off. That's what the system was setup for.

But they weren't followed... that's what this Lawsuit is about...

thank you so much for the tip to hold down a comment to reply to it!!! that’s a game changer!!!

@x96petersen1, you just advanced to level 2!

You are using the pronoun they very broadly. The laws put into place on how to cast ballots is separate from the laws surrounding the certification process. The certification laws are to gather official vote totals and make sure everything is in order then rubber stamp then. This was all followed.

If there was fraud or they changed rules they shouldn't have or mailin ballots are wrong or whatever that's a different thing.

The "they" I was speaking of was the election laws as a whole which also includes the certification rules.

Yes that's the problem 😂 you said it's not constitutional for the state Congress to make a system for the executive branch to administer which doles out electors based on voting results. This is not the case. In fact ideally they put something in place the does this.

Other election laws are related but different.

Any news out of SCOTUS?

Dennis said they are live

Shouldn't the legislature have the ability to intervene in the certification process since they are the responsible party though? That would make sense to me. That as the Constitution says they have the express power to select electors they are the responsible party for the results to go through... Its some semantics I agree but these are things that sound like they should be checks and balances in line with other checks and balances built into the system

I dont see it though

When you dont see something. Doesnt mean stop looking so its not there.

@thebrodys the response was filed so its over to them.

If Congress has a power it's not just do whatever that power is whenever. They have rules in place from the Constitution and the state Constitutions and prior laws and rules set in place. Like the filibuster or senate majority leader these are just things Congress made up to put limits on themselves of how their body of Congress should work.

If they set a law like we increased the murder penalty from 10 to 15 years minimum and they want to change it back they have that power but they have to follow the rules to put it into law and get the governor to sign. It has to be in a session of Congress following the various rules to go through the process. They have the power to change how electors are granted. But in this case they need a special session to open up to make changes to laws already on the books. They have to follow the rules set in place to get a special session. Some of these types of protections were put in place by earlier state congresses to prevent the future versions of themselves from acting rashly.

Some of this Texas stuff is bonkers do they think this is compelling to a court?

That’s not news

There’s been affidavits for weeks testifying to election workers curing ballots with fake names and dobs

Take away the electoral votes from these swing states. They will get their stuff together by the next election ..watch...

I am just waiting for the decision which I assume is coming later tonight

3-8 page per curim, texas go away

is my bet

@Dedkraken , for some arguments that information is useful. According to Wayne county's official results they published that is roughly the right number. I counted 172k that were absentee ballots that were cast in precincts that had 0 registered voters.

There were precincts with no registered voters?

That doesn't sound plausable

That is what their official results say.

@AquaCat, you just advanced to level 2!

What source are you looking at?

You must be misreading something

It seems very unlikely there are precinct with zero registered voters