Message from @o(o.o)o-face
Discord ID: 786132469862236160
actually i need to stop, i dont know a lot, so anything can happen
lets hope texas win, but its a long shotr
I'm not very optimistic either, but I keep a sliver of hope in me
Scotus almost always works in an appellate jurisdiction
This is@not an appellate situation
Again, it's an original jurisdiction
And state vs Tate in a federal election manner changes the state relationship bit
The jurisdiction part should clear it up
im not arguing if they have original jurisdiction or not, they do
I'm not arguing either
it goes to the SCOTUS without an appeal
but what im saying is
SCOTUS, hardly, if ever, accepts a first instance trial
you will never find in SCOTUS some sort of first instance trial on evidence, etc...
Most aren't state v state
This is the rate instance
Rare
The second link is super in depth
@zola here
```In the late twentieth century, the Supreme Court further limited its original docket by declaring that it would exercise discretion over whether to hear cases even if they were legitimately within the Court's jurisdiction. In a series of cases in 1971, including Ohio v. Wyandotte Chemicals Corp ., the Court declined to hear environmental pollution claims brought by states against corporations that dealt with complex and technical factual questions. The justices ruled that the states had other available forums to bring their claims and that the cases were not "appropriate" for the Court in light of its primary function as the nation's highest appellate tribunal. The Court resolved to examine the "seriousness and dignity" of claims so as to preserve its resources for consideration of appeals involving federal questions. The Supreme Court soon expanded its appropriateness doctrine to decline to hear some cases between two states, even where the Court's jurisdiction was exclusive.```
they dont need to take it
they can send it right back down to the lower courts
even if it involves 2 states
The exception to that is sTate v tate
That's company v state
did you read the entire thing?
Yes why would you assume I didnt
its up to SCOTUS to decide if they want to take it or not, "appropriateness doctrine"
"decline to hear some cases between two states, even where the Court's jurisdiction was exclusive"
State v state is always original jurisdiction
..
That was regarding the chemical company vs the states
Not states vs states
bro
youre not understanding at all
The irony
I knew you weren’t conservative