News:

When one conveys certain things, particularly of such gravity, should one not then appropriately cite sources, authorities...

Main Menu

Recent Supreme Court rulings on election

Started by Ecurb Noselrub, October 29, 2020, 04:51:53 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Ecurb Noselrub

SCOTUS has already considered three cases involving this election, from the states of Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and North Carolina.  Generally, the cases dealt with counting votes received after election day (November 3). Two out of the three cases ended up in favor of the Democrat's position.  The common thread seems to be that the Court (especially Chief Justice Roberts) does not want the rules changed close to the election.  The key is what the legislature of a particular state has enacted with respect to election procedure.  The Court does not seem to want to upset that legislative decision.

Of course, Amy Coney Barrett was not a part of any of these. She may be on the next one.  But so far, I'm cautiously optimistic.  To be sure, however, we need a clear Biden victory on election night or soon thereafter. 

Davin

Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on October 29, 2020, 04:51:53 PM
SCOTUS has already considered three cases involving this election, from the states of Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and North Carolina.  Generally, the cases dealt with counting votes received after election day (November 3). Two out of the three cases ended up in favor of the Democrat's position.  The common thread seems to be that the Court (especially Chief Justice Roberts) does not want the rules changed close to the election.  The key is what the legislature of a particular state has enacted with respect to election procedure.  The Court does not seem to want to upset that legislative decision.

Of course, Amy Coney Barrett was not a part of any of these. She may be on the next one.  But so far, I'm cautiously optimistic.  To be sure, however, we need a clear Biden victory on election night or soon thereafter.
That is a tall order, some states are not allowed to start counting ballots until election day, and there are a lot more early ballots this election by a lot. I think heard that we already passed 50% of the total votes cast in 2016.

And I agree that the clearer the victory for Biden, the less bullshit there will be.

It is expected that the early results will favor Trump and then there will be a blue shift afterwards like there always is. What the Trumpster fires are worried about, is that the blue shift will be bigger than previous elections, so they want to take what looks like a win on election day and run with that and sow doubt in any changes afterwards. I'd even expect them to pull some bullshit around 6pm EST using whatever positive results they get, since many red states will be closing and counting before we get to big blue states on the west coast.

Like everything else the GOP does, this won't be about integrity or whatever reason they will lie about, this will be them grabbing any and every opportunity no matter how much it conflicts with their stated principles the times before. Much like the SCOTUS seat in an election year. The GOP are bad faith actors.
Always question all authorities because the authority you don't question is the most dangerous... except me, never question me.

billy rubin

one red flag was justice kavanaugh pointing out that it might not be contructive to include late-arriving-but-legal mail-in votes because

listen:

. . . they might flip the results of the election. . .

the red flag is that until the legal mail-in ballots arrive and are counted, there are NO RESULTS OF THE ELECTION TO FLIP

this is really a red flag, because it points out that kavanaugh is willing to speak--and to  judge-- before he thinks.

we knew that, but i'm not happy anyway


"I cannot understand the popularity of that kind of music, which is based on repetition. In a civilized society, things don't need to be said more than three times."