Agnostic.com

1 0

LINK Supreme Court rejects Trump's bid to overturn election - CNNPolitics

The Supreme Court on Friday rejected a bid from Texas' attorney general -- supported by President Donald Trump -- to block the ballots of millions of voters in battleground states that went in favor of President-elect Joe Biden.

The court's order, issued with no public dissents, to dismiss the challenge is the strongest indication yet that Trump has no chance of overturning election results in court, and that even the justices whom he placed there have no interest in allowing his desperate legal bids to continue.

snytiger6 9 Dec 12
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

1 comment

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

1

I think the supreme court erred. Part of their role is to hear disputes between states. So they should have allowed the case........then rejected it.
By refusing to hear it at all, not allowing all evidence to be presented before making a decision, merely plays into the Trump fan base plans. In their minds, the deep state has ignored their concerns which is why the court should have heard the case, so they can't say that.

What they say makes no difference. I took a couple of semesters of law I college and I couldn’t believe Texas or any of the clown car squad that signed on had legal standing to file the suit. That’s the law, and gets law suites thrown out of any court without a hearing. I’m just thankful the Justices actually took their oath of office seriously, unlike all thos Congressmen that signed onto it.

@Barnie2years yes based in law but Trump's clown will take advantage of the refusal to give it air.
Perhaps you could answer a question for me (from your studies)?
I have heard that Texas has a unique place in the constitution; the lone star state. Could you please clarify ie what difference applies to Texas re constitution if any?

@powder legally, nothing. Too bad we didn’t let Mexico keep them. Because of it’s size, wealth due to oil and cattle, it swings a big dick. But they signed into the Union and agreed to the same terms as all the other fifty stated, ruled bu the US Constitution. Every time things don’t go their way, they threaten succession (again) like they did when they joined the Confederacy. They did it during Obama’s presidency, even taking the idea to the point of law. There are no laws in the Constitution that single out individual states that I know of. Any one else?
The no standing refusal to hear is not new, and Thomas did not sign on the last time either. Two states sued Colorado in 2018 when they voted to legalize marijuana (I believe it was Oklahoma and Nebraska). The Court rejected it without a hearing for the same reason, neither state had standing to sue under the law.

@Barnie2years cheers

You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:560232
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.