Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
This can't be serious. Texas has no standing to sue another state on that state's conduct under state law. Texas has no interest in another state's decision to send out ballot applications, nor any interest in whether those who received ballots in response to submitting the application returned those ballots, or how these ballots were handled once received. The pols who run the Texas government become more and more bizarre each day.
They have standing if they believe fraudulent practices in other States made their EV's worthless.
No do not haqve standing and they cannot demonstrate any harm. The arguments are the same ones that Trump has beem making ad nauseum and been thrown out ad nauseum.
Their EC votes have been countered by illegal changes to voting laws in the States in question.
This can't be serious. Texas has no standing to sue another state on that state's conduct under state law. Texas has no interest in another state's decision to send out ballot applications, nor any interest in whether those who received ballots in response to submitting the application returned those ballots, or how these ballots were handled once received. The pols who run the Texas government become more and more bizarre each day.
They have standing if they believe fraudulent practices in other States made their EV's worthless.
No do not haqve standing and they cannot demonstrate any harm. The arguments are the same ones that Trump has beem making ad nauseum and been thrown out ad nauseum.
Their EC votes have been countered by illegal changes to voting laws in the States in question.
They have not. There have been no illegal changes.
Dont mess with Texas, ya freaking commies!
Texas Sues Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin at Supreme Court over Election Rules
Texas filed a lawsuit directly with the U.S. Supreme Court before midnight on Monday challenging election results in four other states.www.breitbart.com
Texas is asking the Supreme Court to order the states to allow their legislatures to appoint their electors. The lawsuit says:Certain officials in the Defendant States presented the pandemic as the justification for ignoring state laws regarding absentee and mail-in voting. The Defendant States flooded their citizenry with tens of millions of ballot applications and ballots in derogation of statutory controls as to how they are lawfully received, evaluated, and counted. Whether well intentioned or not, these unconstitutional acts had the same uniform effect—they made the 2020 election less secure in the Defendant States. Those changes are inconsistent with relevant state laws and were made by non-legislative entities, without any consent by the state legislatures. The acts of these officials thus directly violated the Constitution.…This case presents a question of law: Did the Defendant States violate the Electors Clause by taking non-legislative actions to change the election rules that would govern the appointment of presidential electors? These non-legislative changes to the Defendant States’ election laws facilitated the casting and counting of ballots in violation of state law, which, in turn, violated the Electors Clause of Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution. By these unlawful acts, the Defendant States have not only tainted the integrity of their own citizens’ vote, but their actions have also debased the votes of citizens in Plaintiff State and other States that remained loyal to the Constitution.Texas approached the Supreme Court directly because Article III provides that it is the court of first impression on subjects where it has original jurisdiction, such as disputes between two or more states.
Texas is the crookedest state in the union. Texas has no standing as they cannot prove any harm.
Asking for more consistency and uniformity in the Electors Clause is “crooked”? How? The lawsuit brought on by Texas will most likely not change the outcome of the ‘20 Election but it will give US some necessary structure around voting integrity moving forward and not having future elections be conducted like some third world, banana republic.
The state of Texas has no standing and cannot demonstrate any harm. Any structure is up to the individual states Texas has no say in this. You are the ones who are trying to turn this into a third world banana republic. These arguments have been rejected by federal and state judges. Republican and Democrat and even judges appointed bt Trump.
All Texas has to do is get their AG or their SC to pass it along to the SC.
They don't just pass things. There has to be constitutional issues.
There are. Find the thread and read it. Its on this board.
This can't be serious. Texas has no standing to sue another state on that state's conduct under state law. Texas has no interest in another state's decision to send out ballot applications, nor any interest in whether those who received ballots in response to submitting the application returned those ballots, or how these ballots were handled once received. The pols who run the Texas government become more and more bizarre each day.
They have standing if they believe fraudulent practices in other States made their EV's worthless.
No do not haqve standing and they cannot demonstrate any harm. The arguments are the same ones that Trump has beem making ad nauseum and been thrown out ad nauseum.
Their EC votes have been countered by illegal changes to voting laws in the States in question.
Illegal according to who? Not the States in question. The issues of the legality of the election have been adjudicated and found to be within the authority of State officials. With the elections being legal, authoritative and certified.
Texas is demanding the Supreme Court to overrule the Pennsylvania on its OWN rulings on its OWN laws.
Good luck with that.
"Coup d'etat" in crook speak means stopping the theft of the presidential election through the Supreme Court.The moron with an Augusto Pinochet avatar is advocating a coup d’etat. Will wonders never cease?
This can't be serious. Texas has no standing to sue another state on that state's conduct under state law. Texas has no interest in another state's decision to send out ballot applications, nor any interest in whether those who received ballots in response to submitting the application returned those ballots, or how these ballots were handled once received. The pols who run the Texas government become more and more bizarre each day.
They have standing if they believe fraudulent practices in other States made their EV's worthless.
No do not haqve standing and they cannot demonstrate any harm. The arguments are the same ones that Trump has beem making ad nauseum and been thrown out ad nauseum.
Their EC votes have been countered by illegal changes to voting laws in the States in question.
Illegal according to who? Not the States in question. The issues of the legality of the election have been adjudicated and found to be within the authority of State officials. With the elections being legal, authoritative and certified.
Texas is demanding the Supreme Court to overrule the Pennsylvania on its OWN rulings on its OWN laws.
Good luck with that.
So State officials said they did things legally because they said they did things legally.
A circular argument from a circle jerk.
A small cabal of angry pissed off children doing their best to hijack the thread and this issue.see the usual suspects not talking the topic but trolling people and attacking their viewpoints, not the topic.
www.theguardian.com
This can't be serious. Texas has no standing to sue another state on that state's conduct under state law. Texas has no interest in another state's decision to send out ballot applications, nor any interest in whether those who received ballots in response to submitting the application returned those ballots, or how these ballots were handled once received. The pols who run the Texas government become more and more bizarre each day.
They have standing if they believe fraudulent practices in other States made their EV's worthless.
No do not haqve standing and they cannot demonstrate any harm. The arguments are the same ones that Trump has beem making ad nauseum and been thrown out ad nauseum.
Their EC votes have been countered by illegal changes to voting laws in the States in question.
They have not. There have been no illegal changes.
Judges unilaterally allowed changes not approved by the legislature, and the legislatures at the State level have the power to set election guidelines.
"Hail Mary full of Grace the L....."
Texas also is asking the supreme court to delay the 14 December deadline for electoral college votes to be cast.
Paul Smith, a professor at Georgetown University’s law school, said Texas did not have a legitimate basis to bring the suit.
“There is no possible way that the state of Texas has standing to complain about how other states counted the votes and how they are about to cast their electoral votes,” Smith said.
Trump’s campaign and his allies have pursued unsuccessful lawsuits in Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and other states, making unfounded claims of widespread election fraud. Judges appointed under Democratic and Republican administrations, including Trump’s, have ruled against the president’s campaign, often in excoriating tones.
Trump lost those four states after winning them in 2016.
The supreme court is not obligated to hear the case and has said in previous decisions that its “original jurisdiction” that allows litigation between states to be filed directly with the nine justices should be invoked sparingly.
Texas sues four states over election results in effort to help Donald Trump
Long-shot lawsuit against Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin is latest legal effort intended to reverse Biden’s victory
This can't be serious. Texas has no standing to sue another state on that state's conduct under state law. Texas has no interest in another state's decision to send out ballot applications, nor any interest in whether those who received ballots in response to submitting the application returned those ballots, or how these ballots were handled once received. The pols who run the Texas government become more and more bizarre each day.
They have standing if they believe fraudulent practices in other States made their EV's worthless.
No do not haqve standing and they cannot demonstrate any harm. The arguments are the same ones that Trump has beem making ad nauseum and been thrown out ad nauseum.
Their EC votes have been countered by illegal changes to voting laws in the States in question.
Illegal according to who? Not the States in question. The issues of the legality of the election have been adjudicated and found to be within the authority of State officials. With the elections being legal, authoritative and certified.
Texas is demanding the Supreme Court to overrule the Pennsylvania on its OWN rulings on its OWN laws.
Good luck with that.
So State officials said they did things legally because they said they did things legally.
A circular argument from a circle jerk.
Save of course, that the states in question have their own courts to adjudicate such issues in. And none of those courts have found any such 'violations'.
So I ask again, illegal according to who? Not the States in question. And Texas has no authority to rule on the elections of other States.
So where is the violation?
If they wanted to change the legally determined electoral process that that have been using for decades in most cases, the democrats should have gone through the legislative process. This was another example of democrats wanting to rule by fiat, not by law.Allowing citizens to vote by mail during a pandemic emergency is not fraud.
People calling it fraud are way off base.
Will the candidates in the primary using this method be invalidated, and special election winners be evicted, along with all the candidates in the Nov 3 election be invalidated?
After the citizens were told by their govt that it was legal and to vote that way?
I do not think so.
And if it did go to the legislature or house, wouldnt they be obligated on their electors chosen, to be the electors of the citizen's choice...who clearly did choose Biden, not Trump, but a technicality and not fraud by the citizens, is the complaint?
Why weren't the constitutionality complaints brought and settled during the primaries and before the Nov elections?
There is no way the SC would change and usurp the will of the people at this point.
No, like in Bush V Gore, SCOTUS would be ENFORCING state law. None of the affected states passed laws changing election procedures.If you bootlickers really think that the SCOTUS is going to overrule state law to turn over the election process to the state legislatures, you’re out of your fucking minds
This can't be serious. Texas has no standing to sue another state on that state's conduct under state law. Texas has no interest in another state's decision to send out ballot applications, nor any interest in whether those who received ballots in response to submitting the application returned those ballots, or how these ballots were handled once received. The pols who run the Texas government become more and more bizarre each day.
They have standing if they believe fraudulent practices in other States made their EV's worthless.
No do not haqve standing and they cannot demonstrate any harm. The arguments are the same ones that Trump has beem making ad nauseum and been thrown out ad nauseum.
Their EC votes have been countered by illegal changes to voting laws in the States in question.
They have not. There have been no illegal changes.
Judges unilaterally allowed changes not approved by the legislature, and the legislatures at the State level have the power to set election guidelines.
State judges have the right to interpret the state's constitutions. State legislatures do not have the power to ignore the state's constitution. If the Supreme Court wants to interpret state constitutions then they should resign and get judgeships in the state courts.
Gee..you are so "sharp" I'm surprised you can't figure this out...not really.Save of course, that the states in question have their own courts to adjudicate such issues in. And none of those courts have found any such 'violations'.
So I ask again, illegal according to who? Not the States in question. And Texas has no authority to rule on the elections of other States.
So where is the violation?
This can't be serious. Texas has no standing to sue another state on that state's conduct under state law. Texas has no interest in another state's decision to send out ballot applications, nor any interest in whether those who received ballots in response to submitting the application returned those ballots, or how these ballots were handled once received. The pols who run the Texas government become more and more bizarre each day.
They have standing if they believe fraudulent practices in other States made their EV's worthless.
No do not haqve standing and they cannot demonstrate any harm. The arguments are the same ones that Trump has beem making ad nauseum and been thrown out ad nauseum.
Their EC votes have been countered by illegal changes to voting laws in the States in question.
Illegal according to who? Not the States in question. The issues of the legality of the election have been adjudicated and found to be within the authority of State officials. With the elections being legal, authoritative and certified.
Texas is demanding the Supreme Court to overrule the Pennsylvania on its OWN rulings on its OWN laws.
Good luck with that.
So State officials said they did things legally because they said they did things legally.
A circular argument from a circle jerk.
Save of course, that the states in question have their own courts to adjudicate such issues in. And none of those courts have found any such 'violations'.
So I ask again, illegal according to who? Not the States in question. And Texas has no authority to rule on the elections of other States.
So where is the violation?
The SC gets to answer this. The SC has constitutional authority to determine if the legislatures set the election rules, or some other branch.
Why are you so scared of all this?
This can't be serious. Texas has no standing to sue another state on that state's conduct under state law. Texas has no interest in another state's decision to send out ballot applications, nor any interest in whether those who received ballots in response to submitting the application returned those ballots, or how these ballots were handled once received. The pols who run the Texas government become more and more bizarre each day.
They have standing if they believe fraudulent practices in other States made their EV's worthless.
No do not haqve standing and they cannot demonstrate any harm. The arguments are the same ones that Trump has beem making ad nauseum and been thrown out ad nauseum.
Their EC votes have been countered by illegal changes to voting laws in the States in question.
They have not. There have been no illegal changes.
Judges unilaterally allowed changes not approved by the legislature, and the legislatures at the State level have the power to set election guidelines.
State judges have the right to interpret the state's constitutions. State legislatures do not have the power to ignore the state's constitution. If the Supreme Court wants to interpret state constitutions then they should resign and get judgeships in the state courts.
The US constitution says State legislatures set the rules for Presidential elector selection, and thus the elections. State judges can't override that.
The proof is very simple, the affected states changed election procedures in violation of their own laws by executive fiat. That isn't even open to argument, the proof is in the record.Good for Texas. Lets hope the SC takes a look at this fraudulent election cause there is all kinds of evidence out there. And those states did indeed not follow the constitution.
There are no constitutional issues. The Supreme Court is not a investigatory court. They require proof and sate and federal judges have said they have provided no proof.
This can't be serious. Texas has no standing to sue another state on that state's conduct under state law. Texas has no interest in another state's decision to send out ballot applications, nor any interest in whether those who received ballots in response to submitting the application returned those ballots, or how these ballots were handled once received. The pols who run the Texas government become more and more bizarre each day.
They have standing if they believe fraudulent practices in other States made their EV's worthless.
No do not haqve standing and they cannot demonstrate any harm. The arguments are the same ones that Trump has beem making ad nauseum and been thrown out ad nauseum.
Their EC votes have been countered by illegal changes to voting laws in the States in question.
Illegal according to who? Not the States in question. The issues of the legality of the election have been adjudicated and found to be within the authority of State officials. With the elections being legal, authoritative and certified.
Texas is demanding the Supreme Court to overrule the Pennsylvania on its OWN rulings on its OWN laws.
Good luck with that.
So State officials said they did things legally because they said they did things legally.
A circular argument from a circle jerk.
Save of course, that the states in question have their own courts to adjudicate such issues in. And none of those courts have found any such 'violations'.
So I ask again, illegal according to who? Not the States in question. And Texas has no authority to rule on the elections of other States.
So where is the violation?
The SC gets to answer this. The SC has constitutional authority to determine if the legislatures set the election rules, or some other branch.
Why are you so scared of all this?
So no violation. That was easy.
And the Supreme Court overruling say, Pennsylvania on the application of Pennsylvania election laws, delaying the electoral vote, and disenfranchising tens of millions of voters on behalf of the people of Texas seems.....wildly unlikely.
