Just why in the heck is a Reserve Judge on this case?
Saw part of that; full of lies and idiocy.
This judge showed his hand yesterday when he said that finding for Trump would be the most sensational ruling ever from a federal bench. He was telegraphing that he’d rather let massive fraud stand than be accused of overturning the election. It had nothing to do with the merits. Indeed, I don’t think many - if any at all - of Trunp’s legal defeats have been about the law.
Robed cowards. These lawyers in black robes are pretty brave when they can use the massive force of govt against some poor sap who’s being railroaded by the US Govt. Not so much when things get hot. Cowards, cowards, cowards. Traitors.
I have no confidence that there are 5 SCOTUS members brave enough to withstand what would happen in the streets if they followed the Constitution.
The only ones I'm sure of are Thomas and Alito.
Has to go to state supreme court, which had sent it back for review by lower courts per state law. This decision was needed to start the appeal process.
So this local news outlet that supposedly serves Wisconsin relied on AP for the propaganda, eh?
The Supreme Court already ruled differently in a slightly different Wisconsin case a month ago.
SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS
Associated Pee
So, if there is fraud or some other problem with a state's election then the state courts can fashion a remedy, and/or failing that the state legislatures can step in and appoint their own slate of electors to the EC under Constitution Article 2 & 12.
The argument that PA, WI, MI etc. have is that issues relating to fraud in their elections are not and can never be properly before SCOTUS - i.e. that the issue is "non-justiciable." The sole Constitutional remedy and the only one in keeping with the inherent federal nature of our legal order is that any remedy is limited to the state's own court system and legislature, and it's just nobody else's business, including SCOTUS. A sort of "what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas" argument.
The counter-argument that TX et al can make is that rampant fraud obviously dilutes the power of the federal election held in TX and in effect gives TX a president that should not have been elected had PA, WI, MI et al not engaged in gross violations of their own rules. It therefore directly effects TX and so the remedy doesn't "stay in Vegas", so to speak. I think that's a colorable argument, but I think it is weak given two factors. First, SCOTUS doesn't want this case. They want to punt, and given my considerable experience with judges (I'm a lawyer) they'll use whatever doctrine at hand to do so. Second, I find the "political question" argument compelling. TX and the rest of us signed onto a compact wherein we trust each other to run substantially fair elections. If MI, for example, breaks that faith (which they clearly did) then the remedy isn't to run to SCOTUS complaining about it. That is superficial - it doesn't go to the core of the problem, which is that the national compact has broken down due to MI's permitting gross and in-your-face election theft.
No, the remedy is, by the very nature of our federal system based on a high degree of trust among the several States, to question the Union itself. The remedy is to first be sought in a Constitutional Convention and, failing that, by Articles of Secession.
We are conservatives. By definition, our default position is that we have a precious birthright and we will endure almost anything in order to keep the inherited estate together. But we must now admit, in my opinion, that the compact has broken down. There is no trust of urban America. They've broken faith with us. And the GOP legislatures have proved themselves once again to be the RINO cowards that they always were.
Even if SCOTUS decides to intervene, the fact remains that SCOTUS was never supposed to be placed in this position by our Constitutional order. It's just a question of time before we'll have to face the issue again.
Constitutional Convention or Articles of Secession. That's the only manly choice I see.
Associated Pee
More “judges” paid off by the CCP
Hey, that's actually an improvement from all the prior Judge rulings in Republican election lawsuits so far, isn't it?
/s
Just curious. Who actually filed this lawsuit. Was it Trump or someone else ?
No one should expect state courts to decide anything that favors Trump.
These Court “losses” give plaintiff legal Cause to pursue the Appeal Process. The case moves up to the next higher court, all the way to the US Supreme Court.
Never gunna happen. We we’re screwed, and NOTHING will change that. This is all BS.