ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2020 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Wednesday, December 09, 2020

Mailvox: a Canadian take on the Texas lawsuit

I received this email from a lawyer with a background in Canadian constitutional law, which I would not consider particularly relevant, but it's never a bad idea to get the outsider's perspective, especially that of a well-informed outsider, as this gentleman obviously is. I note that as of this writing, 9 States have already signed onto the Texas lawsuit.

I'm writing this email with the proviso that it's been several years since I last practiced law in a professional capacity, and that my Con Law training was in Canadian Con Law, but on the face of it, the Lawsuit by Texas (and now Louisiana and apparently a bunch of other states) in the Supreme Court probably opens the way to a Trump win.  You'll probably have other correspondents on this issue with more relevant legal experience but here's my tuppence worth.   I'm viewing this strictly through a legal lens although politics inevitably creeps into it.  I take no view of or make any predictions concerning the likelihood of Trump crossing the Rubicon.  I'm just laying out why this case matters, and why it may succeed.

This is the case that SCOTUS has been waiting for.   There's nothing the Court would be more loathe to do than to wade directly into disputed factual allegations of fraud when time is of the essence and the election hangs in the balance.  As the court of ultimate appeal SCOTUS' role is primarily to decide questions of law, not of fact and in the usual course of events, they would hear the appeals of the Trump campaign and others of the dismissal by various judicial hacks of their election Fraud cases and if they had merit return them to the lower courts with an order that they be heard.   What they would not do is weigh the evidence, make a finding of fact and a dispositive order in favour of one side or the other.   That's now how it's supposed to work and given that the majority of the Court now is now comprised of originalists, or those with originalist leanings, it would go against everything they supposedly stand for to wade into what is a very political controversy and start busting heads right or left where their authority to do so is questionable.   The ordinary course of these cases would be to appeal up through the appellate court system to SCOTUS if necessary until their case was returned to a lower court with an order to that court to hear it.  No doubt the various low level judicial hacks would then make adverse judgements even after hearing the evidence and the whole process would begin again until the SCOTUS was forced to issue a dispositive ruling.  But that process could take months, if not years.

But there's one big exception to this SCOTUS's appellate role - the Supreme Court is the court of original jurisdiction for disputes between State governments - it can hear evidence and determine questions of fact. And in the current dispute there probably won't even be much of that - few, if any of the facts that the Plaintiffs will rely upon are going to be seriously disputed and the substance of the case will revolve around the application of those facts to the election framework set out in the Constitution.   So not only is this a case that the Supreme Court is almost REQUIRED to hear, it's going to be about the interpretation of very clear, straightforward clauses of the Constitution, and their application to the present circumstances.  It's an Originalist's legal wet dream.

 This case also presents the best opportunity of the court to deal with the matter cleanly and without appearing partisan (who am I kidding - the court will be labelled partisan by the media if it gives anything but a full-throated endorsement of Joe Biden).  The answers to the questions presented by the Plaintiffs are simple and set out very clearly in the Constitution.   The likely best-case scenario for the Plaintiffs is that the Court agrees that the election was irrevocably flawed and throws out the results in some or all of the four states in question, leaving neither candidate with a majority of electoral college votes and passing the matter to Congress to decide.  Even if the court declines to take that step, simply reiterating that how electors are selected is solely at the discretion of state legislatures (A state legislature is entirely within its rights to get rid of presidential elections and simply appoint electors as it sees fit and indeed in the early years of the Republic several did just that), it would give authoritative legal cover to the legislatures in the impugned states to nullify the results and select their own electors.

My view is that what path the Court takes will largely depend upon how many States formally support Texas.  If it's only Texas, Louisiana and one or two others then the court may be inclined to take a minimalist approach.  But if 15 or 20 States sign on then SCOTUS may see this as evidence that vast swathes of the country have no confidence in the fairness of the recent election and it will be more inclined to nullify election results and put this squarely in the lap of Congress.  The fact that there are a half-dozen or so other states apparently joining, including Florida (so 2 of the 3 most populous states in the Union) gives credence to the view that the legitimacy of this election is seriously in doubt and the Court must act.  

Lastly there's no way GEOTUS did not know that this lawsuit was in the pipeline, nor that states other than  Texas would be signing on.   The fact that he recently appeared at a Rally in Georgia confirms this in my view.   The more Americans get fired up and bombard there state and congressional politicians with demands that they honour the will of the voter, the more likely additional states will sign on to Texas' lawsuit, and the more GOP state legislators and congresscritters will find enough backbone to do the right thing.  Of course even if SCOTUS puts this in the lap of Congress or State legislatures this does not guarantee Donald Trump will be returned as President.  There's nothing as feckless as a GOP politico being promised by Immigration lobbyists, big tech, and the Chamber of Commerce that the Benjamins will flow and that he's got a great future as a Senator/Governor/President if he takes the statesman-like approach and ignores the yokels who voted for him.  That said from a legal perspective, the outcome of the election looks a lot less certain than it did 24 hours ago.

While I obviously welcome the idea of President Trump winning through the courts, don't forget that this is only the second of his three primary options, and it may not even be his preferred one. Then again, as Sun Tzu teaches, the best victories are those that don't require taking the field.

UPDATE: 17 States have signed on. Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah and West Virginia.

UPDATE: Arizona and Alaska too. Looks like we're at the lawyer's magic 20 States.

Labels:

80 Comments:

Blogger Giraffe December 09, 2020 11:06 AM  

"it would give authoritative legal cover to the legislatures in the impugned states to nullify the results and select their own electors."

Great, we have to depend on those guys. Oh well, we still have the amphibious assault option.

Blogger Timmy3 December 09, 2020 11:15 AM  

The Texas lawsuit omitted Arizona and perhaps another swing state, but ultimately it should affect all states who want to contest the elections.

Blogger Dystopian Jackanapes December 09, 2020 11:22 AM  

POTUS (GEOTUS) Says... #overturn

Blogger Theproductofafineeduction December 09, 2020 11:37 AM  

@2.

You are too short for this ride. Go home.

Blogger Rick December 09, 2020 11:38 AM  

I like how this Canadian says GEOTUS

Blogger Duh December 09, 2020 11:42 AM  

"This is the case that SCOTUS has been waiting for"

That's what I like to hear!

Blogger Lazarus December 09, 2020 11:57 AM  

Lastly there's no way GEOTUS did not know that this lawsuit was in the pipeline, nor that states other than Texas would be signing on.

For at least a couple of years I'd guess.

Blogger cheddarman December 09, 2020 12:00 PM  

Vox I am not as smart as you, not even close, but imo a victory that sees our enemies hung by the neck until dead is the best victory

Blogger Matrick December 09, 2020 12:02 PM  

(Correct me if wrong) I think it's important to note that Trump actually has more electoral college votes than Biden does, currently, and therefore there is no need to overturn anything. The contested states merely need to deal with the fraud and give the votes to the winning candidate. The only thing being overturned is the media's premature calling of the result.

Blogger Avalanche December 09, 2020 12:04 PM  

@2 Your sad list of things 'he ain't done right' leads me to ask: are you completely unaware of the God Emperor's ENTIRE CAREER?! Have you missed the major and minor things he has done to become the world-famous -- and rightly feared by other businessmen -- multimillionaire builder?

Trump's reputation across the globe as a cut-throat business man who gets what he wants, where and when he wants, almost without exception is legendary, and very well earned! His willingness to take big risks -- which, of course, included some big failures -- has led to his fame -- and his reputation for insanely detailed preparations before every 'combat' that very rarely fail makes him the best -- and probably the ONLY -- person on the globe with any chance to slow the destruction of the U.S.

You complain he didn't win on the troop draw-downs, and yet huge numbers of the troops HAVE been drawn down. He did NOT increase the numbers of troops -- or WARS! -- the U.S. had its troops in. Buh-buh-but he didn't get them ALL back. {eye roll}

He hasn't crushed the social media criminals. No, but EVERY American now knows what they are doing! They may not care to DO anything, they may not even care to quit -- but they KNOW, without question, that the asocial media are corrupt. Did you forget that back BEFORE Trump, most Americans didn't even think about that?

I'm guessing you've never been in the military. You don't know what battlefield prep is more important than almost anything. IF Trump had hauled Hillary or Comey or McCabe in front of the (massively corrupted!) courts, back when we-all really wanted him to? Well, look at the states that are not even setting BAIL anymore -- just chuck 'em all back onto the street!

Look at Flynn and Stone: WHAT would be the point of trying any of the Dem criminals in courts that would let a Dem activist be the jury foreperson in a case like Stone's?! Or a judge who would REFUSE to accept not just defendant AND prosecutor agreeing to end the corrupt-as-hell case (Flynn) but EVEN after the appeals courts said, in essence, cut it out Sullivan and let Flynn go -- he STILL tried to hang Flynn? Even after the pardon?

SHOULD Trump have tried to get ANYthing through a corrupted court -- or should he have spent his time preparing enough courts (battlefields!) where he could at least fight a fair(-er) battle?

Anonymous Anonymous December 09, 2020 12:06 PM  

Cool, now do Canada, mask mandates and lockdowns.

@ Rick. There are lots of pro-Trump Canadians. Just not enough.

Blogger SemiSpook37 December 09, 2020 12:06 PM  

@2

I just love how these midwits think they know everything based on what they've seen and think that they're right.

There is a TON of stuff going on behind the scenes that not even the savviest "insider" has any clue of what's going on. All the bloviating in the world isn't going to make you right. Stop feigning your ignorance on the rest of us.

Blogger Revelation Means Hope December 09, 2020 12:15 PM  

Yes, win the election AND mass arrest and convict the corruption. That would be the best.

Would love to see a major news network get perp walked on live TV. I want to see thousands of the small fish frying and serving the max sentence for vote fraud.

But I'm okay with antifa burning down their own blue cities and then getting shot during martial law.

Blogger Matrick December 09, 2020 12:17 PM  

(Correct me if wrong) I think it's important to note that Trump actually has more electoral college votes than Biden does, currently, and therefore there is no need to overturn anything. The contested states merely need to deal with the fraud and give the votes to the winning candidate. The only thing being overturned is the media's premature calling of the result.

Blogger Chiva December 09, 2020 12:28 PM  

"a victory that sees our enemies hung by the neck until dead is the best victory"

I agree with this. This is a time of contempt.

Blogger Johnny December 09, 2020 12:34 PM  

@2

Because Trump builds large and expensive buildings in urban areas, he has long term experience in dealing with bureaucratic establishments. For that reason, I doubt it is incompetence that keeps him from going head to head with the deep state. Among the other possibilities, he may simply not be all that conservative. He spends money like a Democrat.

His positioning himself to do the martial law only tells us that he wants it as an option. And perhaps it is helpful to have the appearance of being willing to do it. I would think he wants the minions to put him back in to avoid the appearance that it is only a selfish desire to keep himself in power.

As things are set up, if Trump gets back in he will have a pretty good case for moving more strongly than he has it the past. Step one would be a willingness to enforce the law against some of these characters.

Blogger Bammin December 09, 2020 12:35 PM  

Goes to show that Soros should be thrown out a la Hungarian style, and his AG's thrown out too.

Blogger The Course of Empire December 09, 2020 12:37 PM  

Now just watch all the midwit SJWs scream, "this is clearly a fake, he used the wrong form of "their/there/they're" when he said "The more Americans get fired up and bombard there state and congressional politicians with demands that they honour the will of the voter . . ." so that one mistake invalidates everything he said! ;)

Blogger Joeplanet December 09, 2020 12:38 PM  

Number Two, A perfect moniker, is he I s drawn into the trap as are the emperor‘s enemies.

Top analysis there, John Galt.

Blogger doctrev December 09, 2020 12:38 PM  

Avalanche wrote:
SHOULD Trump have tried to get ANYthing through a corrupted court -- or should he have spent his time preparing enough courts (battlefields!) where he could at least fight a fair(-er) battle?


Donald Trump hasn't put anything TRULY controversial before the Supreme Court. Oh, they've backed presidential powers in some cases and Roberts has turned traitor in others, but nothing that by itself changes the foundation of the Republic, and nothing that the President decided merited full on violence in response. Which means SCOTUS credibility is mostly preserved on the eve of declaring another presidential candidate to be benefitting from a vast criminal enterprise.

Blogger Rick December 09, 2020 12:44 PM  

There will be more.

Blogger Rick December 09, 2020 12:44 PM  

Don’t waste your energy. He’s not one of us.

Blogger Rick December 09, 2020 12:55 PM  

PSA:
Lame Cherry thinks there’s a war coming (in addition to the information war):

http://lamecherry.blogspot.com/2020/12/rikki-dont-lose-that-number.html?m=1

Blogger Doug Cranmer December 09, 2020 12:56 PM  

@Sean "@ Rick. There are lots of pro-Trump Canadians. Just not enough."

Get outside of the cloud cities and the diversity and into the heartland and heritage Canadians. We see the same level of corruption here. China is embedded in everything and it's very obvious. Especially in Tech. But it's clear we've been infiltrated in our politics as well. India is certainly at play, too. There's no way our elections are not manipulated.

Blogger LR December 09, 2020 12:56 PM  

https://www.theverge.com/2020/12/9/22165355/youtube-biden-election-victory-misinformation-rules-remove-content-oan

Youtube is going to remove content that contests the election as widely fraudulent.

They are relying on control of public opinion and academic opinion to shout down/"disappear" actual judicial scrutiny or legal remedy.

I think a simultaneous 3-pronged approach might be a good one.

Get the SC to lend its weight to the allegations/charges.

Whichever the SC decides, make sure everything is legally in place to lawfully call for emergency powers and get the remaining loyal military on board.

Finally, disseminate the results of the forensic investigations via any and all OTHER channels.

Remember the Soviet Union fell by fax.
If the internet is being closed to 80 million citizens, we can go back to pamphleteering and leaflets, plastering bill-boards with ads, scrawling graffiti, push text-messages, faxes, loudspeaker announcements on the street, blimps across the sky...

Bring it on.
WE DON'T NEED THE INTERNET.They do.

Blogger Unknown December 09, 2020 12:57 PM  

A great read - thanks to the author for his insights.

My only question to be answered now is how acutely the SCOTUS is aware that this action by TX, FL, etc. is almost certainly the final "lead-free" option to resolve this mess.

@Kraemer

Agreed. Trump is in his heart a Boomer CivNat and will do everything he can to save MUH CONSTITUTION believing that he's "Saving America" in the process. That's certainly a less kinetic option than the alternative, and - who knows? - could possibly even "work" for at least a while, IF he goes medieval on the fraudsters after 20JAN21.

But it seems inescapable to me that some form of "crossing" is imminent.

Blogger Nate December 09, 2020 1:00 PM  

One of the main ways you can tell that you should pay attention to someone... is that start off... rather than telling you how expert they are... they tell you all the reasons you should be double check what they say.

Also... no gamma has ever done this. ever.

Blogger Stilicho December 09, 2020 1:03 PM  

As an experienced American lawyer, I do not disagree with the canuck's analysis. As I've stated in other threads, this is the sort of case that SCOTUS likes to take.

Blogger nbfdmd December 09, 2020 1:08 PM  

Nate wrote:One of the main ways you can tell that you should pay attention to someone... is that start off... rather than telling you how expert they are... they tell you all the reasons you should be double check what they say.

Also... no gamma has ever done this. ever.


It really is amazing how, if you listen closely, people reveal a lot about the structure of their personality just through the way they communicate, and even individual word choices.

Blogger Newscaper312 December 09, 2020 1:09 PM  

@matrick
Haha re "merely"
WTF do you think the whole reason for going the SCOTUS route is?

Blogger Silly but True December 09, 2020 1:13 PM  

We don’t need mass arrests. If you ever browse Andy Ngo’s listings of #resist / #Bidenriots arrests, you can clearly see this collection of bizarre, broken leftists are in a worse hell in their normal state of being than than anything anyone can do to them.

I’m fine with Obama, Biden or Clinton — pick one or both — serving time as a representative proxy.

Blogger VD December 09, 2020 1:14 PM  

But he isn't going to "cross the rubicon". He either wins in ct or nothing.

That's what Pompeius Magnus said. I hope the Deep State is fully in agreement with you.

Blogger Jack Amok December 09, 2020 1:17 PM  

In the short run, the value of this case is obvious. In the long run, it has a lot of potential too, as it could help lay some of the foundation for ending the ability of blue hell-hole city machines to ruin things for everyone else, that it's a right to be insulated from someone else's corruption.

Ultimately, I don't expect that sort of change to be enacted 100% peacefully because the hell-hole machines have too much to lose, but every bit of foundation is helpful.

Blogger GrumpusAurelius December 09, 2020 1:21 PM  

Galt why do you assume the members of the military wouldn't want to defend the Constitution and the electoral integrity of their country?

Take your black pills somewhere else.

Blogger Blume December 09, 2020 1:22 PM  

You are right Cheddarman. Box is just saying its even better when they tie their own noose and have friend kick the striker out from under their feet.

Blogger nbfdmd December 09, 2020 1:24 PM  

JohnAltGalt wrote:I have a 135 IQ. Not the smartest guy here, but I don't think I'm technically a "midwit".

135 actually does make you a midwit here. Probably the minimum IQ for anyone to even read this blog is 120+.

Blogger Man of the Atom December 09, 2020 1:25 PM  

The Xanatos Gambit of the Great Revealer now encompasses the USSC. All proceeds as expected.

Blogger OMGDwayne December 09, 2020 1:29 PM  

Good news. Happy news. But all this legal wrangling is just more evidence that the system is now irrevocably broken. The courts are part of that system. They cannot be relied upon. They are the very definition of unreliable.
The system has been spouting leaks and burning out bearings and flailing around and wildly shedding parts for decades like some sort of Jean Tinguely self-destructive kinetic sculpture, and now we know that there is no fixing it. The cancerous Left has now metastasized it to death. That was always their goal anyway.
Winning a victory in the courts will not deport Third-World savages. It will not destroy the Leftist (((entertainment industry))) or the (((mainstream media))).
It will not result in orders to police and military to shut down BLM and Antifa with all the extreme measures necessary. It will not shut down the Satanic (((Soros))) gold stream.
It will not bring home the military so that they can line up on the borders with orders to shoot to kill.
Only one thing has a chance of achieving most of these desirable things, and that is crossing the Rubicon with horns blaring and swords unsheathed. The God Emperor was born for this.

Blogger Silly but True December 09, 2020 1:30 PM  

To all the naysayers, I question what in their mind is an appropriate venue for a State to reconcile grievance with another?

The simple answer is explained in 5th grade civics class, but it’s apparently been a long time since 5th grade for a lot of people.

Ignore the election specifics; say Texas and Pennsylvania have a disagreement. Who do they think mediates between them?

Or if they think TX suit is bogus, is civil war their only option?

Fine. We can go that route too. Let Swalwell be the first to nuke an American city; we’ll deal with him too.

Blogger JohnAltGalt December 09, 2020 2:13 PM  

nbfdmd wrote:JohnAltGalt wrote:I have a 135 IQ. Not the smartest guy here, but I don't think I'm technically a "midwit".

135 actually does make you a midwit here. Probably the minimum IQ for anyone to even read this blog is 120+.


Yeah, yeah - You're the best.

Blogger JohnAltGalt December 09, 2020 2:28 PM  

GrumpusAurelius wrote:Galt why do you assume the members of the military wouldn't want to defend the Constitution and the electoral integrity of their country?

Take your black pills somewhere else.


I'm not black pilled. I'm a father of three. I am in it to win it. The problem isn't the military men. It is the leadership. And I'm not assuming anything. I'm just observing what the military leadership has done to date, which has been treasonous. Time will tell. Flynn's call for martial law certainly supports the hypothesis that Trump might do something drastic as required by the Constitution. And if he does, I will 100% support him.

Blogger Akulkis December 09, 2020 2:33 PM  

"Goes to show that Soros should be thrown out a la Hungarian style, and his AG's thrown out too."

Soros hasn't stepped foot in the U.S. for years...

Blogger Akulkis December 09, 2020 2:47 PM  

"
Ultimately, I don't expect that sort of change to be enacted 100% peacefully because the hell-hole machines have too much to lose, but every bit of foundation is helpful."

They're going to lose a lot more when rural guys drive in, and put a couple .308 bullets into each and every electrical substation transformer in the city.

In *normal* times, the lead time when ordering just one is around 18 months.

Blogger Akulkis December 09, 2020 2:55 PM  

" The problem isn't the military men. It is the leadership. And I'm not assuming anything. I'm just observing what the military leadership has done to date, which has been treasonous."

The trigger-pullers in combat arms, if not under loyal officers, will GO FIND LOYAL OFFICERS. Combat support the nuts, somewhat less. Combat service support units will probably first fight an internal civil war themselves.

NCOs really run things, especially in the reserve components, where officers (like in the regular army) come and go from assignment to assignment, but most E-7 and below have been within their company for years and years

Blogger GrumpusAurelius December 09, 2020 3:14 PM  

Who cares how many kids you have? Why even mention that?

You are black pilled. That's why you think it's over and the military leadership won't back the commander in chief.
This claim is incorrect.

Blogger El Rojo December 09, 2020 3:27 PM  

I was happy to be wrong about the Scotus cuckiness as they only denied emergency injunctive relief of PA. And I hope that they do the right thing with the Texas suit.

IMHO if they do the right thing this is what I think will happen:

1: Scotus kicks the election to the state legislatures and/or congress.

2: They don't cuck and give the election to the GE.

3: From the left: "scotus is partisan, the elections are already certified!" "Biden won!"Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

4: GEOTUS "I win. Suck it." The Left governors of the swing states: "We certified the election; Biden is president, scotus can go suck it."

5: GEOTUS "Are you are disobeying a scotus order? Why thank you."
"Insurrection Act - Engage!"

6: The left "But the election is certiReeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!"
"Hitler, Hitler, Hitler!" MSM goes nuts about a "coup". Antifa
and BLM go nuts - The GE lets the blue suburbs burn for a bit to
show America what assholes they really are.

7: GEOTUS "Do any of you recall my 2018 executive order? I do..."
Cue Emergency broadcast system to lay it out for the people.

8: Fun ensues.

Blogger Uncle John's Band December 09, 2020 3:39 PM  

135... spooky.

Blogger Kirk December 09, 2020 3:50 PM  

Total of 18 states are supporting Texas' lawsuit now.

 

Amici curiae are the States of Missouri, Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, and West Virginia. Amici have several important interests in this case.

Blogger JohnAltGalt December 09, 2020 3:50 PM  

GrumpusAurelius wrote:Who cares how many kids you have? Why even mention that?

You are black pilled. That's why you think it's over and the military leadership won't back the commander in chief.

This claim is incorrect.



Because victory is necessary. I don't think anything is over.

Blogger JD Curtis December 09, 2020 3:58 PM  

West Virginia's AG has now joined Texas brief

Link

Blogger D. December 09, 2020 4:07 PM  

Growing

17 States File Amicus Brief With Supreme Court in Support of Texas Election Lawsuit

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/12/09/17-states-file-amicus-brief-with-supreme-court-in-support-of-texas-election-lawsuit/#more-205938

Blogger KPKinSunnyPhiladelphia December 09, 2020 4:25 PM  

Stilicho wrote:As an experienced American lawyer, I do not disagree with the canuck's analysis. As I've stated in other threads, this is the sort of case that SCOTUS likes to take.

Right, it's perfect. It's a question of laws and the adherence of those laws to the Constitution.

Copy of the suit here:

https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/images/admin/2020/Press/SCOTUSFiling.pdf

I would urge everyone at least to read pages 12 through 39 which detail the facts of state violations and usurpations of election law. All of those facts are indisputable. I originally thought that PA would be out because the legislature did pass a bill about mail-in ballots, but there are other Secys of State action beyond even THAT legislation.

The entire case will turn on an simple inference: do these unilateral violations of state election law by each state's executive effectively usurp the power of state's legislative body? The operative clause in the Constitution is of course in Article 2, Section 1.

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors

The SC needs believe that departures from election law unilaterally by Governors and Secretaries of State is equivalent to "appointing electors" in "such Manner" that the legislature DID NOT direct.

It's an inferential leap, but not a huge one.

Article I, Section 4, Clause 1 of the Constitution supports this inferential leap, even thought that specific clause only applies to the House and Senate. To wit:

The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof.

The Founders clearly wanted the State Legislatures to make decisions about elections, not the Executive.

OK, possible outcomes.

1. SC does nothing, no opinion. Nothing.

2. SC doesn't rule on the constitutional question, but says that it's up to Legislatures to select electors. No rule on the merits. You guys decide, we wash our hands of the matter.

3. SC says all the Executive unilateral rulings are unconstitutional, and votes gathered from those actions are also unconstitutional, but it's up to each legislature to decide on what to do. This would be the "provide cover" ruling.

4. SC says all the Executive unilateral rulings are unconstitutional, and votes gathered from those actions are also unconstitutional and should be thrown out, and electors chosen must be done based on the remaining votes. (Cue the media "SC Overturns Election!!)

5. SC says all the Executive unilateral rulings are unconstitutional, and votes gathered from those actions are also unconstitutional. Remedy: order an election do-over in those states according to the extant laws, with votes counted and electors selected before Inauguration Day. Can easily be done in a month.

If I had to bet, I'd go with #3, but #5 is the most intriguing. It's not an "overturn" but a "do over." Gives cover to everybody, even though the Dems and the Media lackeys would scream. Election do over could be combined with #3 as a option, rather than an "order" as in #5.


Blogger Mr. B.A.D. December 09, 2020 4:27 PM  

Update: 17 total have joined the suite

Anonymous Anonymous December 09, 2020 4:28 PM  

@ Doug Cranmer

I am Canadian (not by choice) and I talk to lots of rural folk daily. It’s just that there’s still Toronto, Vancouver, Edmonton and Montreal.

I grew up in rural Ontario.

Blogger GrumpusAurelius December 09, 2020 4:40 PM  

If victory is necessary then grab your nuts and sack up Galt.

Stop spreading your own discomfort. Biden didn't win. Let Geotus do his thing before you doom us all.

Blogger Nate December 09, 2020 4:44 PM  

for them what are keeping track... there are now a total of 16 states that have joined Texas in the lawsuit.

There is no way around this now. its way to big.

Blogger Angela December 09, 2020 5:21 PM  

I'm frequently reminded of the book of Esther and sincerely pray for Haman's end. God's justice is perfect in timing and righteousness. Haman swung from his own gallows.

Blogger Clint December 09, 2020 5:29 PM  

I think we are up to 17 now

Blogger VFM #7634 December 09, 2020 5:37 PM  

UPDATE: 17 States have signed on. Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah and West Virginia.

I thought Kentucky was one of the first ones?

The remaining Trump states are Idaho, Iowa, North Carolina, Ohio, and Wyoming.

Blogger Delayna December 09, 2020 5:41 PM  

#46 El Rojo, that will be an even better Christmas movie than Die Hard.

Blogger VFM #7634 December 09, 2020 6:13 PM  

And Alaska.

Blogger Jack Amok December 09, 2020 6:31 PM  

f I had to bet, I'd go with #3, but #5 is the most intriguing.

The time for #2 is rapidly running out, unless the USSC decides to do the equivalent of what it will be admonishing states for by ordering the Dec 14th date extended to allow state legislatures to meet.

#4 is the option I would like to see, but I'm not sure if the justices would be willing to "punish" voters for the actions of the corrupt election officials in their precincts, no matter how much they deserve it. If they want to go a little old skool on the fraudsters though, this would be an awesome way to do it.

#5 is impractical, and even more so if there is any attempt to prevent a repeat on a grander scale of the fraud.

So I think it's either #1 or #3, with an outside chance of #4.

Blogger Jack Amok December 09, 2020 6:37 PM  

There is no way around this now. its way to big.

Over-under on when CNN will be forced to report on it?

Blogger Ominous Cowherd December 09, 2020 6:44 PM  

Gonna guess that the Murkowski crime family still has enough stroke here in Alaska to keep Alaska from joining in. I'll email Do-nothing Dunleavy anyway.

Blogger Dr. J December 09, 2020 6:48 PM  

Proud of my home state. WV used to be as blue as they come, what with the Coal Miner Unions and whatnot. Man things are getting interesting now! Godspeed to the GE and God bless Texas!

Good to see you around, Nate.

Blogger Dafo December 09, 2020 6:53 PM  

I was at the post office today which had CNN blabbering on about Biden’s cabinet. It will be hilarious when reality is revealed to them.

Blogger Tom December 09, 2020 6:55 PM  

Arizona is in as well.

Blogger Asun December 09, 2020 7:11 PM  

SCOTUS cannot kick this to lower courts. For any interstate issue, SCOTUS is the only court to originate and settle the issue.

Blogger D. December 09, 2020 7:44 PM  

BREAKING: Arizona Joins Texas Election Lawsuit
https://electionwiz.com/2020/12/09/breaking-arizona-joins-texas-election-lawsuit/

Blogger ObliviousSeeker December 09, 2020 8:45 PM  

ABRACADABRA

Blogger Tim Bushong December 09, 2020 8:59 PM  

One word: INDI-freakin'-ANA! That's us...

Blogger Mast Abeam December 09, 2020 9:10 PM  

Hi Vox, I’m reading that Trump himself will testify in front SCOTUS on behalf of , now at writing, 16, wait 17 states for the Texas case.
I know that for many us use GEOTUS represents a very significant historical reference. ( Good branding !)
But I would like to praise a simple POTUS for the brilliant check and balance of our framers foresight to invest such power into a single moral man as a branch of Government.
Vox , later when you write about these days, extend your metaphor beyond the Rubicon ( despite its usefulness to rally) or crossing the Delaware ( despite its historical comparison). Right now, rhetorically, I’m seeing Trump at crossing the Potomac.

Blogger Chris Ritchie December 09, 2020 9:33 PM  

Sent the demand to our AG in Ohio. Thanks for the contact information.

Blogger Tom Paine December 09, 2020 11:23 PM  

Not only is SCOTUS the court to hear cases between the states, the members of SCOTUS get their opportunity to weigh in on an election in which one candidate and his party want to turn their court into a carnival side show by packing it. 25? How many do the National Socialist wish to place on the court? For all of the reasons to hear this case, I think the justices will be anxious to rule on an outcome that will directly effect SCOTUS in the immediate future. As rational and ethical as some of them are, there is a point of self interest which cannot be denied. Very much looking forward to see The God Emperor take the oath on his second term.

Blogger Lee December 09, 2020 11:42 PM  

@10 Avalanche
No military training here. I became an engineer instead.
Seems to me that this might be a bunch of things that all hit at once, or in quick succession.
1. SCOTUS knocks back 4 states. No one has EC votes to win.
[at this point, then it goes to the 1 vote per State system... but what if some of the GOP states are corrupted?]
2a. Colour Revolution starts. all BLM and ANTIFA types start showing up
2b. Some of the sealed indictments start coming out.
[Does this start mopping up all the China assets, Governors, Congressman, etc?]
3a. Rubicon is crossed. Colour Revolution forces start getting mopped up [National Guard?]
3b. Dems scream for UN help. Maybe the second most powerful military in the World has pre-positioned assets close to coastal US [maybe in Canada or Mexico]
4. GEOTUS and team foresaw 3b and propositioned forces to repel.
5. Things start getting kinetic.
6a. Traitors are rounded up and shot.
6b. Enemy fleet is sunk. Invading forces pummeled by bombs and mopped up.

Pretty exciting story.

Blogger Stilicho December 10, 2020 12:45 AM  

Where are you? Central/southeast here

Blogger Stilicho December 10, 2020 12:53 AM  

Who dares, wins

Blogger Lee December 10, 2020 4:54 AM  

In regards to @75 I meant to add that the arrest of traitors gets rid of the traitors that might still in a one vote per state decision, vote against Trump.

The numbers by state are solid, but who know how many Pierre Delectos, NoNames, and Flakes there might be.

Mike Lee (he shames the name) from Utah just put forward another immigration bill removing trying to remove country limits for tech visas.

I'm not even sure Trump would win a one vote per State election, given how many people probably took the ticket.

Maybe the Rubicon is the only way. or they've gotta clear out every rat before the EC votes are cast.

Blogger Unknown December 11, 2020 5:17 PM  

Very well put...
#TRUMPNATIONBABY

Blogger Unknown December 11, 2020 5:20 PM  

YES

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts