Much of the fraud complaint is in the filing from his team and the one from Missouri. Not sure what SCOTUS would be willing to consider. But I think Texas has a strong Constitutional violation case. They should stick to that with SCOTUS.
A motion to intervene, is a request by someone other than the the 2 parties to come into the case because that third party says they have an interest of some sort in the case.
there are about 80 million voters with an interest in that case, and no constitutional prohibition on joining in separate motions to intervene. maybe we should start a class action and pile on.
From what I am reading in the suit, there is no restriction on anyone joining it - anyone who's private party rights were affected is eligible to join.
Would this mean the legal team can pass on their evidence to Texas legal team?
Sorry for my dumb question. I don't know much legal jargon nor legal process stuff and what certain things can imply/allow
Much of the fraud complaint is in the filing from his team and the one from Missouri. Not sure what SCOTUS would be willing to consider. But I think Texas has a strong Constitutional violation case. They should stick to that with SCOTUS.
A motion to intervene, is a request by someone other than the the 2 parties to come into the case because that third party says they have an interest of some sort in the case.
there are about 80 million voters with an interest in that case, and no constitutional prohibition on joining in separate motions to intervene. maybe we should start a class action and pile on.
Consul is Eastman. He appeared in the GA hearing I believe.
I wonder if this is allowed to be posted on youtube. Youtube is asshole.
NEVER SURRENDER!
For anyone interested in following the Docket Files from SCOTUS: https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/22o155.html
Now a response has been filed: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163237/20201209155924009_2020-12-9%20Texas%20Scotus%20Amici%20Brief-%20FINAL.pdf
so they are saying there is no jurisdiction. except they ignore that the only venue for state to state suits is the SCOTUS, NOT the legislature.
From what I am reading in the suit, there is no restriction on anyone joining it - anyone who's private party rights were affected is eligible to join.
Who's with me?
Lol why are the margins on this and the 17 state's amici curae document so insane