posted ago by 6ased
+1880 / -0
It doesn't look like SCOTUS dismissed the PA case. They only denied a request for preliminary injunction. The case still looks active and pending.
It doesn't look like SCOTUS dismissed the PA case. They only denied a request for preliminary injunction. The case still looks active and pending.
but if they though there was a real danger of harm in the meantime, they would have. Is there a decision posted somewhere?
without any explanation or dissents, probably because, the same context is covered in the Texas case, but with a wider scope affecting more states.
As I understand it, emergency injunctive relief is only granted if there is no other legal alternative. Theoretically, the legislature could get off their ass in PA and act, so there is a legal alternative, thus no emergency injunctive relief.
Yeah, the "twitter hot take" on this one was wrong. This was just the immediate injunctive relief being denied, which is why there were no dissents. Not great for everyone's blood pressure, though...
Correct, if this actually spelled the end, we'd get at least an opinion saying why this case didn't deserve to go to the supreme court, as well as at likely 1 dissent in Alito.
pittsburgh PA pede here with a 412 area code and proud to say i just got the 412th UPVOTE
play the lotto
4-1-2 baybayyyyyy
Thank you for making that clear!
What an emergency injunction is
This is a request to for the court to something necessary without the case being heard yet.
For example,
If you were denied asylum by a judge, and your deportation is in a week.
You can appeal your case decision to an appellate judge, but the appellate judge can only schedule your hearing in a month
You would request an emergency injunction on a stay on your deportations, so that you can still be here in a month to argue your case
Judge approves emergency injunction for this reason.
This is not an approval or denial of asylum case.
The person still needs to argue his case and then the appellate judge would approve or deny.
On the contrary, if your deportation was actually 2 months from now, the appeal judge would deny it because it is irrelevant
This is what happened in this case
PA GOP requested an emergency injunction that SCOTUS decertified election, but SCOTUS ruled that certification is irrelevant.
PA Case continues, and they still have to argue thier case to the SCOTUS if scotus takes it on.
Is SCOTUS saying PA certification of the election is 'irrelevant'? Or irrelevant to the court?
I think the first one.
Im not actually a lawyer, so I dont know the finer details but from what I understand, Theres something strange going on.
https://thedonald.win/p/11QlTuYt7R/massive-disinformation-effort-on/
Jenna Ellis's comments are being contradicted by Ted Cruz's
This is true. It made no sense to grant the motion to PA, as that would have complicated the TX case which sought very similar relief from PA/MI/WI/GA.
SCOTUS does what it wants so it probably wouldn't have been as big of a deal for them, but it would have given the defense an argument that they shouldn't grant a 4-state injunction since they have already granted a very similar if not identical injunction to one of those four.
This was a good move by SCOTUS.
That's what seems to be occurring.
"But why wouldn't they grant the injunction????? Time is running out!!!!!!!!!"
Because if they plan to issue an order reversing the state's results, they'll do it before January 6 when the electoral votes are officially calculated in front of congress, rending an injunction unnecessary?
Impossible, r/conservative got 40+ awards from libs trolling
The case is STILL ACTIVE, however it may not be heard for months to years.
If the case is "still active and pending", where is it at this moment? Is it still at the district court level? Or is it already at SCOTUS level.
My understanding is that PA Supreme Court has already dismissed the case with prejudice. So is it still at SCOTUS level?
(I'm assuming and ignoring the existence of Texas case. Just talking about the PA case.)
They did not grant the request because If SCOTUS rules in favor of Kelley eta al whether the results were certified or not will have no meaning.