Texas Election Lawsuit added to Supreme Court Docket

  • Thread starter Thread starter gam197
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I see way too many statements in the news attributed to Trump that are beyond “loosely paraphrased” inaccurate.
 
And if the words are exact (like “new hoax”) the pro-Trump argument is that the words were taken out of context. Or words to that effect.
 
He was joking, of course! You don’t get his sublime sense of humor.
 
Last edited:
MikeInVA said:
Wanting fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court is to be expected of a president. It would be illogical for him not to want to fill the position (immediately).
Click to expand...
LBJ in the same position in 1968 said he would let the next fellow fill the position. Fact.
MikeInVA said:
There are 49 other states that are free to file suit then.
Click to expand...
23 states (including DC, Guam and the Virgin Islands) filed opposing the TX lawsuit. Ohio stated it did not support either side!

The "Christian Family Coalition’ and the Thomas More Society (no surprise) filed briefs in favor of Texas.
 
Last edited:
RootKitWarrior said:
Just quite the opposite. If SCOTUS hears this, then it opens the flood gate for any State to Challenge any State on any matter they choose and have the case sent directly to SCOTUS.
Click to expand...
Right.

I am suggesting they filed in hope that they would be denied, with an affirmation that states are solely responsible for how they handle elections.

They could then point to being solely responsible if the justice dept. wanted to interfere with their obstruction of civil rights.
 
Dovekin said:
They could then point to being solely responsible if the justice dept. wanted to interfere with their obstruction of civil rights.
Click to expand...
The DOJ sues on behalf of state residents against a state. Texas as a state cannot sue on behalf of anyone else.
 
Blah Blah Blah. That didn’t add anything.

Well, other than another voice saying that the people’s vote should be thrown out and a Republican legislature should decide who’s President.

😡
 
Last edited:
Apparently anyone can file an amicus brief.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

America has just experienced an unprecedented rupture to the constitutional “glue” that has held the republic together. It is impossible to overstate the urgency of the case presented by the State of Texas. It is imperative that this Court acknowledge its exclusive jurisdiction and take appropriate action to ensure that the 2020 presidential electors are appointed in a constitutionally appropriate manner.

Think of it as a bank heist, one in which armed robbers crash through the front doors and hightail it to different sections of the building. One approaches a teller and shoves a gun in his face. One sneaks over to the main computer and hacks away. Another goes into the vault and locks it behind him, so he can swap out real bills with counterfeits when no one is looking. That pretty much sums up what happened in the 2020 presidential election. The election was stolen out from under the American people. And the crooks used many means to bring their devious plan to fruition.

Evidence of fraud is there for anyone to see, but the corporate media seem to be engaging in one of three strategies: stating that none exists; ignoring it altogether; or subjecting it to a “fact-checking” process.
 
PaulinVA said:
Apparently anyone can file an amicus brief.
Click to expand...
All you need to file an amicus brief with SCOTUS is the approval of one of the parties (Texas in this case) and to have a member of the SCOTUS bar actually submit it (though they don’t have to write it).

I’ve never written one, but I’ve signed on to a couple.

They very rarely make much difference, but they are the only way to let the court know what you think about a particular issue.
 
billsherman said:
All you need to file an amicus brief with SCOTUS is the approval of one of the parties (Texas in this case) and to have a member of the SCOTUS bar actually submit it (though they don’t have to write it).
Click to expand...
Yes, i know. I was being rhetorical.

I vote for the PA brief as most fiery. Detroit for most factually relevant.

The one above as most crazy.
 
PaulinVA said:
I vote for the PA brief as most fiery. Detroit for most factually relevant.
Click to expand...
I like this: "Ohio respectfully moves for leave to file an amicus curiae brief in support of neither party. "

GA: "Texas has no cognizable interest specific to Texas in how the Vice President votes. Texas’s interest is in its own representation in the Senate; Georgia has not impaired that interest. Texas still has two Senators, and those Senators may represent Texas’s interests however they choose. Even by its own logic, Texas has suffered no injury. "

Richard Bernstein: “There are myriad reasons to deny Plaintiff’s Motions. This amici brief focuses on one: the Constitution does not make this Court the multidistrict litigation panel for trials of presidential election disputes.”
 
Pennsylvania has now joined

There are currently 19 states that are filing. against the 4 states

.(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top