Posted on 12/09/2020 3:11:36 AM PST by RoosterRedux
On Tuesday, the State of Texas filed a lawsuit in the Supreme Court against Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. The suit alleged that, because these states conducted elections that violated their own laws, they tainted the integrity of the vote, something that damaged not only their own citizens but also the citizens in other states. Because this is an intelligent, powerful case, it’s no surprise that eight other states have already joined the litigation.
To date, we’ve seen a multiplicity of lawsuits filed although, significantly, none has come before the Supreme Court for substantive review. Courts in various states, however, have proven resistant to these suits.
As I noted here, partisan judges are issuing what I will politely call “garbage” decisions. Judges are refusing to consider the evidence, with only one Nevada court attempting to do so. Instead, they make variations of the argument that, if courts were to consider Trump’s claims, they would run the risk of “disenfranchising” Biden voters.
That is a singularly dishonest argument. Disenfranchisement occurs when people are deprived of the right to vote. No one was deprived here. What Trump is doing, with his request that every legal vote count, is asking that courts invalidate illegal votes. You cannot disenfranchise an illegal voter, whether that “voter” is dead, a computer algorithm, or a form filled out in a Chinese print shop.
Do you know what happens when you invalidate fraudulent votes and count only legal votes? You identify the winner and loser in an election, as has happened in America since 1792. Those who voted for the losing candidate were not disenfranchised; they just voted for the losing candidate.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Not if only Alito and Maybe Thomas want to hear it.
Oh yes, this thread is begging for trolls to come in and offer their inspirational, uplifting thoughts on it, lol.
Did Trump’s team have anything to do with this, or were they just lucky that someone in Texas came up with the strategy?
It’s all up to the three justices appointed by President Trump. We’ll soon see if they are all Constitutionalists or if there is a Souter in their midst. They only have one chance to save the Republic. Permitting the Steal will result in a court packed with leftists and their instant irrelevance. 20 to 30 years of writing dissenting opinions.
Good morning Rooster.
Law schools teach their (mostly leftist) students to be creative in finding ways to sue. A quick scan at the mainstream propaganda describe it as “hypocrisy”, “legally troubled TX AG”, “Hail Mary attempt to block election”, “fuels distrust of election results”. It is quite a novel legal argument.
Will the S Ct take it on? If court agrees with Texas, think about future ramifications on the election system. Every loss, especially kkkrap losses, could be taken to the S Ct regardless of the merits. Therefore, the Court if they decide in Texas favor, would need to narrowly tailor its decision to the facts at issue. This case would never have been brought had the state legislators stepped up more quickly, if at all, and used their constitutional powers to address the all too obvious illegal voting and violation of procedural voting safeguards carried out by some of those entrusted with running fair elections.
Previous judges would not hear voter fraud cases, deciding that, if they were to consider Trump’s claims,
they would run the risk of “disenfranchising” Biden voters...a singularly dishonest argument. Disenfranchisement
occurs when people are deprived of the right to vote. No one was "deprived" of the vote here.
No one can disenfranchise an illegal voter, particularly when that “Biden voter” is
<><> dead,
<><> an amorphous computer algorithm,
<><> or a form mfg in a Chinese print shop submitted as a vote.
Bump
Why are you bothering us with the facts...
Man, what is this world coming to...
“Did Trump’s team have anything to do with this, or were they just lucky ...”
They talk. Lawyers do it all the time. Notice how a few other state AGs have jumped in. Collaboration and coordination isn’t restricted to leftist lawyers who represent environmentalists, or who sue Trump in NY for his tax returns while a House Committee subpoenas his tax records, etc etc.
Maybe you are really asking a legal question - whether the Trump campaign would have standing to bring a suit on the grounds that Texas has claimed. Even if “yes”, why “spend the time/effort/money” if the case is better (politically, legally) when you have a “friendly ally” who could make you a potential beneficiary of a favorable decision?
Widburg is by far the best legal analyst we have, and that includes McCarthy, Levin and all the others.
She is right. This law suit is powerful.
I hope SCOTUS issues a decision based on the fundamental Constitutional principle that elections must be fair, meaning that the processes and procedures on their face must be SEEN to be fair.
No, I’m just thinking how lucky we are that Texas came up with this. The Trump team was not getting any traction.
If ever Texas were to make her move, it is now.
Andrea does a good job of covering the angles to this complex issue. Where Widburg really uncovers it is in dismissing the disenfranchisement claim when illegal votes are permitted to be cast by certain states and why voters in states like Texas are disenfranchised by the results when that’s allowed to happen.
Can the defendant states substitute a set of electors that represent violation of their own state laws?
In theory the law would be followed.
In practice Democrats only care if they win.
They will use any means possible to reach that goal.
The Trump team basically expected to lose at the state levels (courts, etc) in order to get their actions to the Supreme Court. What we got to see is not only the corruption and fraud related to the original vote on November 3, but also the corruption involved in covering up the original activity.
But, but, but the news week legal experts say.............
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.