Texas AG Appeals Directly To Amy Covid Barrett To Overturn Election!Posted By Rod Kaufman |
Texas AG Appeals Directly To Amy Covid Barrett To Overturn Election!Posted By Rod Kaufman |
It's an incomplete title thread but I clarified it when I stated the indicted Texas AG wants the supreme's to hear it! Plus, "With Amy Coney Barrett now seated on the Supreme Court, Republicans are pushing for reconsideration of a Pennsylvania case on mail-in voting -- the first potential test of how the new justice will handle election challenges." https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/27/politics/election-2020-supreme-court-voting-challenge/index.htmlOriginally Posted by James Brown
The Supremes will waive this off as a nuisance. The only question that remains is whether you will apologize to ACB for your inaccurate thread title! Jim
Texas AG Appeals Directly To Amy Covid Barrett To Overturn Election!Posted By Rod Kaufman |
I think the closures should be applied equally. I don't understand why they'll close hair salons like supercuts that are clearly following covid guidelines while allowing Costco and Walmart to remain open. Ditto for open restaurant dining. My guess is hair salons and small businesses don't generate the sales tax revenue that a Costco or Walmart does so....Originally Posted by James Brown
They're fools, and I don't deny it. But this mistrust directed to ACB is unearned. At least at this point in time! The only controversial case she has participated in is the Coronavirus/church case. And she got it right. It is acceptable for governors to issue public health orders, but they must be applied to equivalent groups without prejudice. Or do you think it is acceptable or (based in science) for governors to shut down churches while leaving liquor stores, pot shops and strip clubs open?
Jim
Texas AG Appeals Directly To Amy Covid Barrett To Overturn Election!Posted By Rod Kaufman |
Texas AG Appeals Directly To Amy Covid Barrett To Overturn Election!Posted By Rod Kaufman |
As usual, you and your prior "predictions" are full of crap. There's no slam-dunk precedent except in your imagination. I doubt even the conservative Trump appointees on the supreme court will even hear this nonsense from the Texas AG let alone approve of it if my some miracle the court actually decided to waste their time on it.Originally Posted by Greg Shaffer
1. It bypasses all the BS of going through the lower courts 1st
2. It is pretty much a slam dunk as there is precedent. Election laws were modified significantly without legislative approval in all 4 states. Of course the excuse is they were changed to accommodate covid issues. However law is law and any modifications should have gone through the legislature since they are the only body constitutionally allowed to set/modify election law.
3. The USSC has the final say on whether the Trump team can join the case. Either way I dont see that affecting the outcome.
3. It all depends on whether the USSC deigns to hear the case as it is their prerogative as to whether they will or not.
Texas AG Appeals Directly To Amy Covid Barrett To Overturn Election!Posted By Rod Kaufman |
Lol!!! , every post of your proves you have no idea of what you're talking about. It's as whacko as Trump's rationale to join the suit: "The case cites at times inaccurate evidence to question the election result, such as the claim that no candidate has won both Florida and Ohio, as Trump did, and lost the presidential election. Richard Nixon won both states but lost the race in 1960."Originally Posted by Greg Shaffer
LOL....I suggest you go back and read up on the whole Gore/Fla hanging chad issue, what was decided there directly applies now.....
Texas AG Appeals Directly To Amy Covid Barrett To Overturn Election!Posted By Rod Kaufman |
Of course the court is going to ask for a response of the states targeted by the suit, as bogus as it may be. That's normal for this kind of a case.Originally Posted by Greg ShafferGiven the USSC has ordered all 4 states to reply to Paxton's suit by 3pm on Thurs it would seem they intend to take it seriously.....keep laughing Rod you might just get to cry as well lol
Texas AG Appeals Directly To Amy Covid Barrett To Overturn Election!Posted By Rod Kaufman |
Lol!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Originally Posted by Greg ShafferThe criteria is Texas has to show that they would be harmed as a result of other states actions. If indeed it is shown that those states by unconstitutionally rewriting election law impacts Texas (which it would if that caused a President to be elected unconstitutionally) since they would be the President of all the states including Texas.....yadda yadda......Bottom line is they are likely to hear the case and the potential for denying the election is real and not unprecedented.
Texas AG Appeals Directly To Amy Covid Barrett To Overturn Election!Posted By Rod Kaufman |
Texas AG Appeals Directly To Amy Covid Barrett To Overturn Election!Posted By Rod Kaufman |
That's a false internet rumor: https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/dec/09/facebook-posts/no-supreme-court-hasnt-taken-texas-election-case-y/Originally Posted by Greg ShafferOhhh Rod....You can start wringing your hands now and biting your toenails.....
SCOTUS in a 6-3 decision has placed the Texas law suit on the docket to hear the election case against PA, GA, Mich and Wisc! FL, SC, MS, AL, KY, AK, LA and SD as well a others (17 I think) have all joined the Texas suit This could be the back breaker because of the extreme seriousness of a state vs state case involving no campaign or candidate. Ted Cruz will be presenting the case to the High Court.
The major points:
Pennsylvania: The complaint accuses Pennsylvania Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar of, among other things, “without legislative approval, unilaterally abrogating” Pennsylvania statutes that require “signature verification for absentee or mail-in ballots.” These changes were “not ratified” by the Pennsylvania Legislature.
Georgia: Similarly, the complaint describes how Georgia’s secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, also “without legislative approval, unilaterally abrogated Georgia’s statute governing the signature verification process for absentee ballots.”
Michigan: The complaint states that Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson “abrogated Michigan election statutes related to absentee ballot applications and signature verification.”
Wisconsin: Lastly, the Wisconsin’s elections commission made similar changes in state laws without the permission of the Legislature that “weakened, or did away with, established security procedures put in place by the Wisconsin Legislature to ensure absentee ballot integrity.”
The complaint describes how voters in different parts of these states were treated differently. For example, election officials in Philadelphia and Allegheny Counties in Pennsylvania set up a “cure process” for voters in those jurisdictions whose absentee ballots did not comply with state legal requirements. Those non-compliant ballots should have been rejected because state law does not allow such a procedure.
As a result of this behavior and similar behavior in other states, there was “more favorable treatment allotted to votes” in areas “administered by local government under Democrat control.”
This differential treatment, says Texas, violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. It cites the Supreme Court’s 2000 decisions in Bush v. Gore, which “prohibits the use of differential standards in the treatment and tabulation of ballots within a state.”
Seems pretty cut and dried to me
