Texas Files Lawsuit at SCOTUS Against GA, PA, MI, and WI

[citygator]

 

[Lesh]

Trump isn't the one who believes the SC hould nevr intervien in state policies or decisions. Unlike you, he supports Plessy v. Fergusen.

If memory serves...Plessey v Fergusen was a SCOTUS decision upholding segregation

Oh...

 

[Toro]

Just to show you how much contempt Trump's legal clown car has for their own rube supporters, Lin Wood, one of the Krappen lawyers, attempted to attach something to the retarded Texas lawsuit - not sure what exactly - and spelled his own name incorrectly rofl

 

[meaner gene]

Trump isn't the one who believes the SC hould nevr intervien in state policies or decisions. Unlike you, he supports Plessy v. Fergusen.

If memory serves...Plessey v Fergusen was a SCOTUS decision upholding segregation

Oh...

Bingo !!!!

 

[Faun]

"This is about Texas challenging state laws, BECAUSE I WANT IT TO BE!!! FUCK EVERYTHING THAT HAS TOLD ME REPEATEDLY THAT THIS IS ABOUT THE CONSTITUTION, BECAUSE I DON'T LIKE THAT THING!!!"

No, it's because they don't have standing, dumbass.

It's like CA suing TX for allowing fracking.

God you guys are stupid.

See page 15 for standing....

Scotus Filing | PDF | Postal Voting | Absentee Ballot

texas ag

www.scribd.com

"The constitutional failures of Defendant States injure Plaintiff States because [the right of suffrage is denied]."

The right to suffrage isn't denied. The folks in Texas got to vote.

The idea that you've lost your right to sufferage if your candidate loses is silly.

You aren't thinking if you think it is simple. I hope that is an exception for you, and not the norm.

If states illegally change their voting rules, such that the election outcome is changed, all of the people in other states who voted for other candidates have effectively had their votes nullified, illegally.

It's somewhat analogous to water rights of states that share the same river. If an upstream state builds a dam, the other states still have access to the river basin, but when they turn on their taps, they don't get as much water as before.

And the proper forum for recourse is the Supreme Court.

It's my opinion that the Dems in some states used the plandemic to illegally steal the election, in violation of their, and the US Constitutions. It's similar to stealing the river water that adjacent states share.

Virginia also changed its voting regulations this year, rather dramatically, but they did it through the legislature, consistent with the Constitution.

Regards,
Jim

Which rules were changed illegally?

Mail-in voting, for one, asshole.

Nothing illegal about it.

If the legislature didn't approve it, then it's illegal.

It is not. Voters approved it. It does not need to be passed by the legislature. You think the legislature is a king.

The Constitution says it needs to be passed by the legislature, moron. You're arguing with the Constitution.

No, it doesn't say it needs to be passed by the legislature, ya fucking moron. It says...

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

Which means a state legislature can choose to let the "manner" of holding an election up to the voters. As the Constitution reads, it's up to the states' legislature.

 

[Toro]

Why bother having a Supreme Court at all then?

That's exactly how Trump feels. What good is a Supreme Court if you can't use it to over turn an election, right?

Trump isn't the one who believes the SC hould nevr intervien in state policies or decisions. Unlike you, he supports Plessy v. Fergusen.

rofl briptard

 

[Faun]

LOLOLOL Can you not think for yourself?

Dumbfuck, they already mailed out 7.7 million applications. Everyone receiving one can check the box to automatically receive absentee ballots for future elections. Meaning....

a) there's no news reporting 7.7 million ballots were mailed unsolicited for the general election; and

b) ballots mailed out would have been based on 7.7 million ballot applications mailed out in the Spring; and

c) mailing out 7.7 million applications in the Spring to all registered voters in Michigan was done by computer. So if they were going to mail ballots in the fall, also by computer, there would have been more than 7.7 million registered voters as many people in Michigan registered to vote over the summer; and

d) this farce is based on a Trump tweet back in May which he himself deleted when it was brought to his attention that he got it wrong...

... and

e) rightards are the biggest fucking idiots on the planet. Your only hope of salvaging this fiasco lies in the hopes that AmericanThinker, who published this, got it wrong and that Texas isn't really suing over this.

But the ones you call "biggest fucking idiots" know that this is a CONSTITUTIONAL lawsuit/issue (Article 2, Section 1), while you are still babbling about ballot applications. You still don't know what the hell this whole thing (1st 3 words of the OP title >
Texas Files Lawsuit

is about, and you're displaying that with flying colors.

Dumbfuck, I quoted what is being reported about the Texas lawsuit.

And while a bunch of states have lined up behind Texas, a bunch of other states have lined up behind the Constitution...

WASHINGTON — More than two dozen states filed motions with the Supreme Court on Thursday opposing Texas' bid to invalidate President-elect Joe Biden's wins in four battleground states, a long-shot legal move that Pennsylvania blasted as a "seditious abuse of the judicial process."​

When you regurgitate fake news all you prove is that you're a brainwashed minion.

Your brain is fake news.

‘Cacophony Of Bogus Claims’: Over 25 States And Territories Slam Texas’ Supreme Court Lawsuit To Overturn Election (forbes.com)
Colorado joins 23-state coalition opposing Texas election lawsuit (thedenverchannel.com)

You use fake news to claim I post fake news?

Not my problem you're incapable of recognizing real news. I even linked a news source you yourself have referenced as a source. Now, because you don't like what it says, you idiotically call that same source, "fake news."

Are you ever not a fucking moron?

Ever???

 

[meaner gene]

The Constitution says it needs to be passed by the legislature, moron. You're arguing with the Constitution.

No, it doesn't say it needs to be passed by the legislature, ya fucking moron. It says...

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

Which means a state legislature can choose to let the "manner" of holding an election up to the voters. As the Constitution reads, it's up to the states' legislature.

Interpretation: Elections Clause | Constitution Center

Interpretations of Elections Clause by constitutional scholars

constitutioncenter.org

The Court also has held that a legislature may delegate its authority under the Elections Clause to other entities or officials.

 

[BWK]

FBI serves subpoena in corruption probe of leader of Trump SCOTUS election ploy: report The FBI is investigating this piece of shit while the Right is trying to prop up their ridiculous law suits. The absurdity of Republicans has reached its peak.

 

[Faun]

The Constitution says it needs to be passed by the legislature, moron. You're arguing with the Constitution.

No, it doesn't say it needs to be passed by the legislature, ya fucking moron. It says...

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

Which means a state legislature can choose to let the "manner" of holding an election up to the voters. As the Constitution reads, it's up to the states' legislature.

Interpretation: Elections Clause | Constitution Center

Interpretations of Elections Clause by constitutional scholars

constitutioncenter.org

The Court also has held that a legislature may delegate its authority under the Elections Clause to other entities or officials.

Fingerboi's a fucking moron. If he says something, you know it's wrong if for no other reason than because he says it.

 

[meaner gene]

Fingerboi's a fucking moron. If he says something, you know it's wrong if for no other reason than because he says it.

There are two kinds of posters. Those who spew what they claim as facts, and those who cite their source.

Most claims made by bripat are the former. Which makes him such a laughing stock.

 

[meaner gene]

yes, I did lie about that. I said it simply to trigger morons like you, and it worked.

He even confesses to it.

 

[BlindBoo]

The so called law and order party seek to disenfranchised millions of voters beyond the established due process of the State and Federal courts who have jurisdiction. It is a bid for one party rule. Well on the road to Fascism.

 

[Hellokitty]

That is yer jist from a media outlet have you researched to find that Pennsylvania did use the process of legislature to okay the changes to the election?

What process of the legislature was used to change election laws in Pa.

For the mail in ballots because of the pandemic which is the same the majority of other states did.

I thought it was the state Supreme Court, not the legislatures, that rule on the mail-in ballot stuff?

They did rule on it and said it was too late to argue the execution of the legislation.

Why was it needed to change the laws on mail-in ballots 2 weeks before the election?

No state would change any voting laws or rules two weeks before an election..

That is exactly what happened in Pennsylvania with the state SC ruling on mail-in ballot signatures.

 

[Moonglow]

That is yer jist from a media outlet have you researched to find that Pennsylvania did use the process of legislature to okay the changes to the election?

What process of the legislature was used to change election laws in Pa.

For the mail in ballots because of the pandemic which is the same the majority of other states did.

I thought it was the state Supreme Court, not the legislatures, that rule on the mail-in ballot stuff?

They did rule on it and said it was too late to argue the execution of the legislation.

Why was it needed to change the laws on mail-in ballots 2 weeks before the election?

No state would change any voting laws or rules two weeks before an election..

That is exactly what happened in Pennsylvania with the state SC ruling on mail-in ballot signatures.

So you do actually know about this...

 

[Hellokitty]

That is yer jist from a media outlet have you researched to find that Pennsylvania did use the process of legislature to okay the changes to the election?

What process of the legislature was used to change election laws in Pa.

For the mail in ballots because of the pandemic which is the same the majority of other states did.

I thought it was the state Supreme Court, not the legislatures, that rule on the mail-in ballot stuff?

They did rule on it and said it was too late to argue the execution of the legislation.

Why was it needed to change the laws on mail-in ballots 2 weeks before the election?

No state would change any voting laws or rules two weeks before an election..

That is exactly what happened in Pennsylvania with the state SC ruling on mail-in ballot signatures.

So you do actually know about this...

I do, and your responses show you either don't or are intentional trying to mislead people.

 

[Toro]

Texas Sen. John Cornyn (R) questioned why the state's attorney general, Ken Paxton (R), believed his state's officials should have a say over how other states conduct their elections.​

​

Speaking with CNN's Manu Raju, Cornyn was referring to Paxton's claim that the results of voting in Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Georgia were "tainted" due to changes to election processes in those states.​

​

"You know, it's very unusual because when a state sues a state, the Supreme Court of the United States has original jurisdiction, so you don't have to go through the ordinary procedure. I read just the summary of it, and I frankly struggle to understand the legal theory of it," Cornyn told CNN.​

​

"Number one, why would a state, even such a great state as Texas, have a say-so on how other states administer their elections?” the senator continued. “We have a diffused and dispersed system, and even though we might not like it, they may think it's unfair those are decided at the state and local level and not at the national level. So it's an interesting theory, but I'm not convinced."​

​

“You know, it's very unusual because when a state sues a state, the Supreme Court of the United States has original jurisdiction, so you don't have to go through the ordinary procedure. I read just the summary of it, and I frankly struggle to understand the legal theory of it.”​

GOP Texas senator questions ‘legal theory’ behind Trump’s lawsuit to challenge state’s election results

Texas Sen. John Cornyn (R) questioned why the state’s attorney general, Ken Paxton (R), believed his state’s officials should have a say over how other states conduct their el…

thehill.com

 

[Toro]

 

[Toro]

 

[Toro]