Reads to be almost a formality, no need for doom. Unlike the rest of the bloated govt, the USSC doesnt want redundancy. The big dick has already landed
They didnt rule against the case, they ruled against stopping certification. The case can still go forward and certification rolled back later depending on the outcome.
They are more than likely going to take the Texas suit and go with that because of its broader scope. Stop with the doom and take a minute to read the 50 threads already posted.
TLDR, SCOTUS is not worried about any action that the state of PA may take pertaining to the election.
TY
Injunctive relief, also known as an injunction, is a remedy which restrains a party from doing certain acts or requires a party to act in a certain way. It is generally only available when there is no other remedy at law and irreparable harm will result if the relief is not granted. The purpose of this form of relief is to prevent future wrong. Such orders, when issued before a judgement, are known as preliminary injunctions that can be punished as contempt if not obeyed. Due to its coercive force, a grant of injunctive relief is subject to immediate review by an appellate court. The standard for review is an abuse of discretion. As such, an injunctive relief will be overturned if the appellate court finds that the trial court issued the relief based on an misapplication of the law or an erroneous factual finding.
Injunctive relief is generally only granted in extreme circumstances. The party seeking a preliminary injunctive relief must demonstrate: (1) irreparable injury in the absence of such an order; (2) that the threatened injury to the moving party outweighs the harm to the opposing party resulting from the order; (3) that the injunction is not adverse to public interest; and (4) that the moving party has a substantial likelihood of success on the merits. In considering these factors, courts have been described to apply a "sliding scale" approach where the more likely a movant will succeed on the merits, the less irreparable harm (to the movant) needs to be shown in granting the injunction. There is no mathematical means of balancing these factors, therefore, the "sliding scale" approach is based on a court's intuitive judgement. It is worth noting that courts will not find irreparable harm where the damages sustained are calculable. New York has held that in such situations, monetary damages serve as an adequate remedy.
Under the Federal scheme, Rule 65 codifies the requirements for injunctive relief.
If you’re not a lawyer, seriously, don’t try to law dog. You’ve no idea what you are saying.
Oh, look a doomer concern troll!
Wrong.
Case is pending.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/120820zr_bq7d.pdf
if it was important then thomas would have ruled with us
we gotta chill with this one man
Reads to be almost a formality, no need for doom. Unlike the rest of the bloated govt, the USSC doesnt want redundancy. The big dick has already landed
They didnt rule against the case, they ruled against stopping certification. The case can still go forward and certification rolled back later depending on the outcome.
They are more than likely going to take the Texas suit and go with that because of its broader scope. Stop with the doom and take a minute to read the 50 threads already posted.
It was just the injunction that they ruled against. They didn't refuse to hear the actual case yet, but probably not a great sign.
TLDR, SCOTUS is not worried about any action that the state of PA may take pertaining to the election.
TY
Injunctive relief, also known as an injunction, is a remedy which restrains a party from doing certain acts or requires a party to act in a certain way. It is generally only available when there is no other remedy at law and irreparable harm will result if the relief is not granted. The purpose of this form of relief is to prevent future wrong. Such orders, when issued before a judgement, are known as preliminary injunctions that can be punished as contempt if not obeyed. Due to its coercive force, a grant of injunctive relief is subject to immediate review by an appellate court. The standard for review is an abuse of discretion. As such, an injunctive relief will be overturned if the appellate court finds that the trial court issued the relief based on an misapplication of the law or an erroneous factual finding.
Injunctive relief is generally only granted in extreme circumstances. The party seeking a preliminary injunctive relief must demonstrate: (1) irreparable injury in the absence of such an order; (2) that the threatened injury to the moving party outweighs the harm to the opposing party resulting from the order; (3) that the injunction is not adverse to public interest; and (4) that the moving party has a substantial likelihood of success on the merits. In considering these factors, courts have been described to apply a "sliding scale" approach where the more likely a movant will succeed on the merits, the less irreparable harm (to the movant) needs to be shown in granting the injunction. There is no mathematical means of balancing these factors, therefore, the "sliding scale" approach is based on a court's intuitive judgement. It is worth noting that courts will not find irreparable harm where the damages sustained are calculable. New York has held that in such situations, monetary damages serve as an adequate remedy.
Under the Federal scheme, Rule 65 codifies the requirements for injunctive relief.
They only denied immediate injunction. Case isn’t dismissed.
FYI: https://thedonald.win/p/11QlTsIe2a/scotus-denied-pa-gop-explanation/
They didn't rule against the case. Only denied the "injunction"
Here's an explanation:
https://thedonald.win/p/11QlTsIvQJ/chill-pedes-we-are-good-scotus-d/
https://thedonald.win/p/11QlTsIvQJ/chill-pedes-we-are-good-scotus-d/
To deport or not to deport? That is the question.
This is a fast track way to take up multi-state lawsuit and decertify the election in GA,PA,MI,WI. no one gets, 270 .
As someone else commented, "SCOTUS does not seem to be terribly concerned about what PA might do". Read that however you wish.
Look at the words Injunctive relief
The case itself has not been adjudicate.
at least it was close