Dark day for SCOTUS

Darth Omar said:
But he went on to say, the Court has a responsibility to ensure states are staying within the constitutional lines in case future electoral outcomes *are* affected by state election law shenanigans.
Click to expand...
Correct. Which means they will certainly hear a case in the next year re. Georgia's proposed voter suppression now in the works.

They refused to hear a case based on nonsense. Pa. expanded vote by mail before Covid, but it ended up being a great move. Nothing illegal or unconstitutional about allowing everyone to vote.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
why are you afraid of an investigation?.........can we see the tax returns of the woman with blond braids?.......she must be hiding something......
Click to expand...

Nobody's afraid of an investigation the thing is we're already past that over 60 judges have told you guys to go piss on yourself
 
Darth Omar said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1363859147129839620

This is a stain on the court.

They won’t even look at the evidence because the issue is ‘moot’? Moot to who? Even if there’s a scant possibility that illegal votes were cast in a national election the issue is not ‘moot’.

But apparently there ‘are more pressing concerns’ for the country, like clearing the road for a peak at Trump’s tax returns.

I’m literally embarrassed for this court.
Click to expand...

When you have conservative and liberal federal judges on the district courts, appellate courts, and Supreme court almost universally ruling against Trump, that is overwhelming evidence they made the correct, legally sound decision.

Your enthrallment and emotional-investment in your Orange Hero counts for nothing in a court of law.
 
katzgar said:
Nobody's afraid of an investigation the thing is we're already past that over 60 judges have told you guys to go piss on yourself
Click to expand...

every state should investigate those involved in the crimes of the 2020 election and stick them in jail so 2024 will nor be a repeat......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
wait......you had an investigation of Trump for four years and found no crimes......and now you say we should not have an investigation because no crimes have been found already?.......
Click to expand...

Plenty of crimes have been found, only a sitting president could not be indicted. Now the shit will hit the fan
 
Darth Omar said:
But he went on to say, the Court has a responsibility to ensure states are staying within the constitutional lines in case future electoral outcomes *are* affected by state election law shenanigans.

Thomas was basically saying the Court was derelict in its duty and he’s right. Whether it affected the outcome is irrelevant. What’s relevant is *the point of law* that is at question.

But since the Court ruled it a moot question, this sends a clear signal to the states that they can play loose with their election ‘laws’ in the future. Democrats hear them loud and clear. Republicans would do well to get on board with it or just keep losing elections.
Click to expand...

It is the role of the states to determine whether it has violated the state constitution or laws and that includes being able to make revisions in the administration of those laws in crisis situations without requiring additional legislation.

The states should have challenged some of these changes when they occurred rather than waiting six months later and then only challenging them after Trump lost. I know they did challenge them in some situations but the courts ruled the increased mail-in votes caused by the pandemic justified changes in election administration. I think Republican objections to giving people three days longer to vote was less a question of whether the state legislature made the changes than whether they thought it would benefit Democrats.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top